Virginian-pilot. (Norfolk, Va.) 1898-1911, 1900-01-18
COURT DECISIONS.
DicEsTED BY w. B. MARTIN.
Exclusively for virgln:an- Pilot.)
Notes Of Cases Recently Decided,
Which are Of Interest to
Our People.
POWELL v. SOUTHERN r. CO.

/ POWELL v. SOUTHERN r. co.
Supreme Court Of North Carolina
December 8, 1899.
WHAT FACTS SUFFICIENT TO
SUBMIT THE QUESTION OF THE
NEGLIGENCE OF A RAILROAD
COMPANY TO THE JURY.
This was an action by an admins
traitor for the death Of his interstate.
alleged to have been caused by a, train
of the defendant company and through
its negligence.
The plaintiff moved the court to
Withdraw the case from the jury on
the ground that there was no evidence
10 sustain 1t. but the court refused.
and there was a verdict and Judgment
for the plantiff. The company APP
pealed.
The court snys:
The defendant contends:
1. That there was no evidence that
the PLAINTIFFS intestate was Killed by
defendants train. There was no eye
witness who saw the killing. but it was
in evidence that the deceased was seen
at u store near the defendants depot,
In Morganton, at 0 o'clock at night,
and again at minutes past IL, and
the next morning he was found lying
dead 300 yards cast of the depot. and
between 1t and CampbelPs crossing, and
about 100 yards from the latter. The
deceased was lying on his back. and
there was blood on the grass and weeds.
Ills mead was lying east, his feet west,
about three or four feet from the end
OF the cross-tlcs. His clothes had dust
on them. He had wound on the back
OF his head: his skull was crushed
wounds sufficient to cause death.
ringers Of right hand torn and right
shoulder bruised. His hat was found
between the cross-ties and had grease
on 1t, and looked like it had been run
over blythe wheel There was no sign
OF. scuflling on the ground The in
estates usual way home was along
the railroad track from the depot to
ChlnpbelPs crossing. When seen that
night at O'Clock, near the depot, lie
was thought TO be sober, but had had n
dram. lie drank whiskcy ana was in
tho habit Of getting drunk. The defcn-
dants freight train passed that night
between and . o'clock, going east
certainly there was moro than n scin-
una oil evidence going TO show that the
deceased was Knocked off the track and
Killed by the train. and the determine
ton OF the fact was properly left TO the
jury.
Z. Inc defendant contends there was
no evidence of negligence. 1t was in
evidence that it was moonlight night
When the deceased was killed; that tho
freight train which passed going cast
between and . o'clock that night was
q heavy train, running twenty-five to
thirty miles an hour; that the engineer
on said train neither sounded the wills
tie Tor the station, which was 800 wards
west or the SPOT where the deceased
was killed. nor for Campbells crossing
which was 100 or more yards east of
the point. nor for the other thc tan
hery) crossing in the town within the
corporate limits of which the deceased
was kiiled,-it being stated that lie
never sounded 1t at all; that the said
town has a population of .. 800 or 5000:
mat the bulk OF man could have beon
discerncd 200 yards away at Q O'Clock
thht night; that no other castbound
train passed that night; that it was
probable that the light of the headlight
would light up the point where the in
testate was struck, so that the engineer
on the right side of the engine might.
with proper lookout, have seen the
man. who was sitting or lying down on
the right side edge of the track. iudr
ing from his being found on that side
mere was evidence in rebuttal of part
Oh the above, but upon the conflict OF
eNldenGe The jury are to decide Upon
the above there was Sufficient evidence
10 submit the case to the jury upon the
issue as to negligence. Affirmed.