Springs v. Tallassee Power Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Springs v. Tallassee Power Co., 114 S.E. 628 (N.C. 1922)
184 N.C. 425; 1922 N.C. LEXIS 102
Clark

Springs v. Tallassee Power Co.

Opinion of the Court

Clark, C. J.

Tbe usual issues, in sueb cases, of negligence, contributory negligence, and assumption of risk were submitted. Tbe defendant asked tbe court to instruct tbe jury as to eacb of tbe three issues, severally, as follows: “If tbe jury shall find tbe facts from all tbe evidence considered in tbe light most favorable to tbe plaintiff, they will answer this issue No.’ ”

On appeal, tbe defendant abandons all exceptions except to tbe refusal of these instructions. Upon careful examination of tbe evidence, we find that there was sufficient evidence for tbe plaintiff to go to tbe jury upon eacb of these three propositions. There was evidence to tbe contrary on eacb of these issues, but that was a matter for tbe jury. In refusing tbe peremptory instructions asked we find

No error.

Reference

Full Case Name
Mary Howard Springs, Administratrix of William E. Springs v. Tallassee Power Company.
Status
Published