Hester v. North Carolina Railroad

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Hester v. North Carolina Railroad

183 S.E. 377, 209 N.C. 843, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 376

DecidedJanuary 22, 1936

StatusPublished

This text of 183 S.E. 377 (Hester v. North Carolina Railroad) 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

Hester v. North Carolina Railroad, 183 S.E. 377, 209 N.C. 843, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 376 (N.C. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This action was instituted by the plaintiff to recover damages for the alleged wrongful death of his intestate. It was alleged and evidence was offered tending to prove that on 18 November, 1934, the intestate, James ~W. Hester, was struck, run over, and killed by a passenger train of the defendants within the corporate limits of the city of Durham, and that the defendants were negligent in that the train which struck the intestate was running at a rate of speed in violation of *844 an ordinance of the city of Durham, and that the engineer failed to blow his whistle or give other signal of the approach of the train. However, there is no evidence as to what position the intestate was in just prior to and at the time he was struck, the evidence being that he was last seen, some few minutes before the train passed, in the public road about 800 feet from the place on the railroad track where his mangled body was subsequently found. In the absence of any evidence as to the intestate’s position upon the track when struck the motion for judgment as of non-suit was properly entered. Norwood v. R. R., 111 N. C., 236, and cases there cited.

Affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

This action was instituted by the plaintiff to recover damages for the alleged wrongful death of his intestate. It was alleged and evidence was offered tending to prove that on 18 November, 1934, the intestate, James ~W. Hester, was struck, run over, and killed by a passenger train of the defendants within the corporate limits of the city of Durham, and that the defendants were negligent in that the train which struck the intestate was running at a rate of speed in violation of *844 an ordinance of the city of Durham, and that the engineer failed to blow his whistle or give other signal of the approach of the train. However, there is no evidence as to what position the intestate was in just prior to and at the time he was struck, the evidence being that he was last seen, some few minutes before the train passed, in the public road about 800 feet from the place on the railroad track where his mangled body was subsequently found. In the absence of any evidence as to the intestate’s position upon the track when struck the motion for judgment as of non-suit was properly entered. Norwood v. R. R., 111 N. C., 236, and cases there cited.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

183 S.E. 377, 209 N.C. 843, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 376, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hester-v-north-carolina-railroad-nc-1936.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack