Brooks v. . R. R.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Brooks v. . R. R.

20 S.E. 190, 115 N.C. 624

DecidedSeptember 5, 1894

StatusPublished

This text of 20 S.E. 190 (Brooks v. . R. R.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brooks v. . R. R., 20 S.E. 190, 115 N.C. 624 (N.C. 1894).

Pincite

Opinion

(For syllabus, see Hansley v. Jamesville and Washington Railroad, at this term.) Though a critical examination of the assignments of error shows that some of the instructions given to the jury and excepted to by defendant were erroneous, upon different grounds, yet we deem it best to hold that this case depends upon the principle announced in the opinion in Hansley v.R. R., ante, 602, in reference to the allowance of vindictive damages, and therefore we grant a new trial.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

(For syllabus, see Hansley v. Jamesville and Washington Railroad, at this term.) Though a critical examination of the assignments of error shows that some of the instructions given to the jury and excepted to by defendant were erroneous, upon different grounds, yet we deem it best to hold that this case depends upon the principle announced in the opinion in Hansley v.R. R., ante, 602, in reference to the allowance of vindictive damages, and therefore we grant a new trial.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 S.E. 190, 115 N.C. 624, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brooks-v-r-r-nc-1894.