Craig v. Suncrest Lumber Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Craig v. Suncrest Lumber Co.

126 S.E. 312, 189 N.C. 137, 1925 N.C. LEXIS 262

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedJanuary 31, 1925

StatusPublished

Cited by12 cases

This text of 126 S.E. 312 (Craig v. Suncrest Lumber Co.) 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

Craig v. Suncrest Lumber Co., 126 S.E. 312, 189 N.C. 137, 1925 N.C. LEXIS 262 (N.C. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

Adams, J.

The plaintiff, wbo is the widow of G-eorge Craig, alleges that ber husband was an employee of the defendant company, perform *138 ing the duties of an engineer on its logging train, and that on 11 April, 1922, he was instantly killed by the negligence of the defendants. Thereafter she qualified as his personal representative and brought suit against the defendants in which she recovered judgment for $12,000. 185 N. C., 560. The present áetion is prosecuted in her individual capacity. She alleges that by reason of her husband’s death she has suffered, now suffers, and will continue to suffer, grief and pain both of body and of mind, as well as the loss of the society, companionship, support, and consortium of her husband.

The defendants demurred to the complaint on the ground that it does not state a cause of action in that in appears upon its face that the deceased was killed instantaneously, and that the action cannot be maintained by the plaintiff in her individual right. The demurrer was sustained and the plaintiff appealed.

At common law a civil action was not permissible for an injury resulting in death. Baker v. Bolton, 1 Camp., 493; Ins. Co. v. Brame, 95 U. S., 754, 24 Law Ed., 580; Mitchell v. Talley, 182 N. C., 683. Under Lord Campbell’s Act (C. S., sec. 160) the suit must be brought by the personal representative, and cannot be prosecuted by the widow of the deceased. Howell v. Comrs., 121 N. C., 363. Conditions may exist under which an action may be brought for loss suffered during the period between the injury and the death, but this principle does not apply when the death is instantaneous. Killian v. R. R., 128 N. C., 261; Croom v. Murphy, 179 N. C., 393. Upon the allegations in the complaint the plaintiff is not entitled to recover for loss of her husband’s society, support, and consortium. This question is discussed and determined in Hinnant v. Power Co., ante, 120.

The demurrer was properly sustained and the judgment is

Affirmed.

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

Adams, J.

The plaintiff, wbo is the widow of G-eorge Craig, alleges that ber husband was an employee of the defendant company, perform *138 ing the duties of an engineer on its logging train, and that on 11 April, 1922, he was instantly killed by the negligence of the defendants. Thereafter she qualified as his personal representative and brought suit against the defendants in which she recovered judgment for $12,000. 185 N. C., 560. The present áetion is prosecuted in her individual capacity. She alleges that by reason of her husband’s death she has suffered, now suffers, and will continue to suffer, grief and pain both of body and of mind, as well as the loss of the society, companionship, support, and consortium of her husband.

The defendants demurred to the complaint on the ground that it does not state a cause of action in that in appears upon its face that the deceased was killed instantaneously, and that the action cannot be maintained by the plaintiff in her individual right. The demurrer was sustained and the plaintiff appealed.

At common law a civil action was not permissible for an injury resulting in death. Baker v. Bolton, 1 Camp., 493; Ins. Co. v. Brame, 95 U. S., 754, 24 Law Ed., 580; Mitchell v. Talley, 182 N. C., 683. Under Lord Campbell’s Act (C. S., sec. 160) the suit must be brought by the personal representative, and cannot be prosecuted by the widow of the deceased. Howell v. Comrs., 121 N. C., 363. Conditions may exist under which an action may be brought for loss suffered during the period between the injury and the death, but this principle does not apply when the death is instantaneous. Killian v. R. R., 128 N. C., 261; Croom v. Murphy, 179 N. C., 393. Upon the allegations in the complaint the plaintiff is not entitled to recover for loss of her husband’s society, support, and consortium. This question is discussed and determined in Hinnant v. Power Co., ante, 120.

The demurrer was properly sustained and the judgment is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

126 S.E. 312, 189 N.C. 137, 1925 N.C. LEXIS 262, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/craig-v-suncrest-lumber-co-nc-1925.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack