TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Woodrow ex rel. Callahan v. Roberts

Woodrow Callahan, by His Next Friend, J. H. Callahan v. Tom Roberts and Wife, Elizabeth Roberts.

Woodrow ex rel. Callahan v. Roberts, 193 S.E. 265 (N.C. 1937)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of North Carolina · State Highest Courts
Decided
October 13, 1937
Judges
WiNBORNE
Citations
193 S.E. 265212 N.C. 2231937 N.C. LEXIS 275

Opinion of the Court — WiNBORNE

WiNBORNE, J.

Conceding, but not deciding, that this case is not within the jurisdiction of the North Carolina Industrial Commission, *225 and that plaintiff can maintain this action in tbe Superior Court, all tbe evidence, considered in tbe light most favorable to tbe plaintiff, fails to sbow any actionable negligence on tbe part of tbe defendants, or either of them. Tbe judgment as of nonsuit was properly entered.

Smith v. Sink, 211 N. C., 725 , and cases there cited.

It rather appears that tbe unfortunate injury to plaintiff was one of those accidents which sometimes happen unexpectedly — “an event resulting from an unknown cause, or an unusual or unexpected event from a known cause; chance; casualty.” Black’s Law Dictionary.

Crutchfield, v. R. R., 76 N. C., 320 ;

Martin v. Mfg. Co., 128 N. C., 264 , 38 S. E., 876 ;

Thomas v. Lawrence, 189 N. C., 521 , 127 S. E., 585 ;

Ingle v. Cassady, 208 N. C., 497 , 181 S. E., 562 .

“An employer is not responsible for an accident simply because it happened, but only when he has contributed to it by some act or omission of duty.”

Thomas v. Lawrence, supra; Luttrell v. Hardin, 193 N. C., 266 , 136 S. E., 726 .

The judgment as of nonsuit being sustained for lack of evidence of actionable negligence, other exceptions upon which plaintiff relies for a new trial need not be considered.

Shoemake v. Refining Co., 208 N. C., 124 , 139 S. E., 334 .

The judgment below is Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1944: 119442026peak 1944 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Benton v. United Bank Building Co.28 S.E.2d 491 (N.C. 1944)

Most recent

  1. Benton v. United Bank Building Co.28 S.E.2d 491 (N.C. 1944)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 7

DepthCaseCited by
Martin v. Highland Park Mfg. Co., 38 S.E. 876 (N.C. 1901) 50
Luttrell v. Hardin, 136 S.E. 726 (N.C. 1927) 25
Thomas v. Lawrence, 127 S.E. 585 (N.C. 1925) 6
Smith v. Sink, 192 S.E. 108 (N.C. 1937) 65
Ingle v. Cassady, 180 S.E. 562 (N.C. 1935) 41
Crutchfield v. R. D. R. R. Co., 76 N.C. 320 (1877) 17
Shoemake v. Sinclair Ref. Co., 179 S.E. 334 (N.C. 1935) 5

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list