O'Neal v. . Jones

155 S.E. 448, 199 N.C. 652, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 207
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedOctober 29, 1930
StatusPublished

This text of 155 S.E. 448 (O'Neal v. . Jones) 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
O'Neal v. . Jones, 155 S.E. 448, 199 N.C. 652, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 207 (N.C. 1930).

Opinion

*653 Pee CuRiam.

There was no allegation or issue as to assumption of risk. There was evidence of negligence, and the testimony tended to show that the plaintiff was working under the direction and supervision of one of the defendants and a foreman, and. that he was doing the work according to instructions given him by said defendant and the foreman. Furthermore, there was evidence that positive assurance was given that there was no danger in doing the work according to the method adopted by the employer.

Hence the trial judge ruled correctly when he submitted the case to the jury. Neville v. Bonsal, 166 N. C., 218, 81 S. E., 448; Fowler v. Conduit Co., 192 N. C., 14, 133 S. E., 188.

No error.

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

Related

Neville v. . Bonsal
81 S.E. 448 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1914)
Fowler Ex Rel. Fowler v. Carolina Cross Arm & Conduit Co.
133 S.E. 188 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1926)
Neville v. Bonsal
166 N.C. 218 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1914)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
155 S.E. 448, 199 N.C. 652, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 207, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oneal-v-jones-nc-1930.