Andrews Ex Rel. Andrews v. Seaboard Air Line Railway Co.
Opinion
The demurrer filed by the defendant admits the relevant facts set out in the complaint and such relevant inferences of fact as may be deducible therefrom, but it does not admit conclusions or inferences of law. Yarborough v. Park Commission, 196 N. C., 284; Ballinger v. Thomas, 195 N. C., 517.
We are of opinion that the complaint, examined in the light of this rule, does not set forth the breach of any duty the defendant owed the plaintiff. Bailey v. R. R., 149 N. C., 169; Monroe v. R. R., 151 N. C., 374; Brigman v. Construction Co., 192 N. C., 791. Reference to the place of the accident as a “death trap” and to the alleged negligence of the defendant as “wilful and wanton” may be disregarded as inferences of law, because the facts relied on are clearly and fully stated. Judgment
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
157 S.E. 431 (Andrews Ex Rel. Andrews v. Seaboard Air Line Railway Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.