White v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

White v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co.

91 S.E. 697, 173 N.C. 705, 1917 N.C. LEXIS 384

DecidedMarch 14, 1917

StatusPublished

This text of 91 S.E. 697 (White v. Norfolk 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

White v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co., 91 S.E. 697, 173 N.C. 705, 1917 N.C. LEXIS 384 (N.C. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

PeR Otteiam.

In tbe petition to rehear tbis case it is said: “Tbe amount of money involved in tbis appeal is very little, and if that was all that was involved, tbis company would not have appealed tbe case to tbis Court. Tbe real question is one that is vital to tbe proper operation of trains in the real interest of 'the traveling public; that question is this: May any and all local agents of railroads abolish or change tbe published schedules of its trains?”

"We think tbe learned counsel for defendant have misconstrued our opinion. We have not decided that local agents of railroads may abolish or change tbe published schedules of trains. Tbe decision in tbis case is made to rest exclusively upon tbe unwarranted negligence of tbe defendant’s agent in misdirecting plaintiff in respect to tbe schedules of its trains. A cursory reading of tbe opinion, we think, makes that manifest .

Petition dismissed.

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

PeR Otteiam.

In tbe petition to rehear tbis case it is said: “Tbe amount of money involved in tbis appeal is very little, and if that was all that was involved, tbis company would not have appealed tbe case to tbis Court. Tbe real question is one that is vital to tbe proper operation of trains in the real interest of 'the traveling public; that question is this: May any and all local agents of railroads abolish or change tbe published schedules of its trains?”

"We think tbe learned counsel for defendant have misconstrued our opinion. We have not decided that local agents of railroads may abolish or change tbe published schedules of trains. Tbe decision in tbis case is made to rest exclusively upon tbe unwarranted negligence of tbe defendant’s agent in misdirecting plaintiff in respect to tbe schedules of its trains. A cursory reading of tbe opinion, we think, makes that manifest .

Petition dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

91 S.E. 697, 173 N.C. 705, 1917 N.C. LEXIS 384, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/white-v-norfolk-southern-railway-co-nc-1917.