Curtis v. Southern Railway Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Curtis v. Southern Railway Co.

66 S.E. 599, 151 N.C. 523, 1909 N.C. LEXIS 313

DecidedDecember 23, 1909

StatusPublished

This text of 66 S.E. 599 (Curtis v. Southern Railway 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

Curtis v. Southern Railway Co., 66 S.E. 599, 151 N.C. 523, 1909 N.C. LEXIS 313 (N.C. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

*524 Per Curiam: :

1. In respect to tlie issue of negligence, the matter in controversy is one of fact purely, with, the burden upon the defendants to show that they discharged their duty to the passenger, and we find no error committed on the trial of it.

2. In respect to the assignment of error in the charge of the judge upon the issue of damage, we are of ojiinion that it is unnecessary to |>ass upon or discuss it. The evidence in regard to the net earnings of the deceased, and his age and condition in life, business, etc., is uncontradicted, and we think that it fully warrants the sum awarded by the jury, even if it be gauged with reference to the theory contended for by defendant.

No error.

The Chief Justice did not sit on the hearing of this case.

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

*524 Per Curiam: :

1. In respect to tlie issue of negligence, the matter in controversy is one of fact purely, with, the burden upon the defendants to show that they discharged their duty to the passenger, and we find no error committed on the trial of it.

2. In respect to the assignment of error in the charge of the judge upon the issue of damage, we are of ojiinion that it is unnecessary to |>ass upon or discuss it. The evidence in regard to the net earnings of the deceased, and his age and condition in life, business, etc., is uncontradicted, and we think that it fully warrants the sum awarded by the jury, even if it be gauged with reference to the theory contended for by defendant.

No error.

The Chief Justice did not sit on the hearing of this case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

66 S.E. 599, 151 N.C. 523, 1909 N.C. LEXIS 313, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/curtis-v-southern-railway-co-nc-1909.