Sherlin v. Southern Railway Co.

198 S.E. 640, 214 N.C. 222, 1938 N.C. LEXIS 307
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedSeptember 28, 1938
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 198 S.E. 640 (Sherlin 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
Sherlin v. Southern Railway Co., 198 S.E. 640, 214 N.C. 222, 1938 N.C. LEXIS 307 (N.C. 1938).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Conceding, but not deciding, that there is evidence of negligence on the part of the defendant, all the evidence leads to the *224 conclusion that tbe intestate was guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law under the well settled decisions of this Court. In such case the doctrine of last clear chance does not apply. Redmon v. R. R., 195 N. C., 764, 143 S. E., 829; Rives v. R. R., 203 N. C., 227, 165 S. E., 709; Rimmer v. R. R., 208 N. C., 198, 179 S. E., 753; Stover v. R. R., 208 N. C., 495, 181 S. E., 345; Reep v. R. R., 210 N. C., 285, 186 S. E., 318; Lemings v. R. R., 211 N. C., 499, 191 S. E., 39.

All the evidence shows that the intestate stepped upon the trestle when the train was approaching and undertook to run across before the train reached there, and failed. The evidence shows that the trestle was not of the open type in the reported cases, but it was floored and surfaced with chats. Outside the ends of the crossties there was sufficient space for a person to walk or stand there in safety as the train passed.

But, on this record there is not sufficient evidence to justify the submission of an issue of last clear chance. It appears that the intestate was in the apparent possession of his faculties, and there was nothing to put the engineer on notice of any impairment in his hearing, or that he would not step off the track to an existent place of safety before the train hit him. The engineer had the right to assume up to the last moment that he would get off the track, and protect himself.

The judgment below is

Affirmed.

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

Related

Arvin v. McClintock
118 S.E.2d 129 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1961)
Barney L. Cagle v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co.
242 F.2d 405 (Fourth Circuit, 1957)
Cagle v. Norfolk Southern Railway
144 F. Supp. 710 (M.D. North Carolina, 1956)
Dennis v. City of Albemarle
90 S.E.2d 532 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1955)
Wagoner v. North Carolina Railroad
77 S.E.2d 701 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1953)
Dowdy v. Southern Railway Co.
75 S.E.2d 639 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1953)
Dowdy v. Southern Ry. Co.
75 S.E.2d 639 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1953)
Middleton v. Norfolk & W. Ry. Co.
165 F.2d 907 (Fourth Circuit, 1948)
Ingram v. . Smoky Mountain Stages, Inc.
35 S.E.2d 337 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1945)
Mercer v. . Powell
12 S.E.2d 227 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1940)
Van Dyke v. . Atlantic Greyhound Corp.
10 S.E.2d 727 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1940)
Sherlin v. Southern Railway Co.
10 S.E.2d 707 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1940)
Cummings v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad
6 S.E.2d 837 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1940)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
198 S.E. 640, 214 N.C. 222, 1938 N.C. LEXIS 307, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sherlin-v-southern-railway-co-nc-1938.