From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dobson v. Telegraph Company

Supreme Court of North Carolina
May 1, 1910
68 S.E. 176 (N.C. 1910)

Opinion

(Filed 25 May, 1910.)

Upon examination of assignments of error in this case, no substantial error is found.

APPEAL from Justice, J., at December Term, 1909, of BURKE.

Avery Ervin for plaintiff.

Avery Avery and G. H. Fearons for defendant.


Action to recover damages for negligence and unreasonable delay in the delivery of the following telegram:

BRIDGEWATER, N.C. 10-19-1908.

To FLETCHER DOBSON, Morganton, N.C.

Lillie Hicks is dead. Bury to-morrow at 3 p. m.

JOHN HICKS.

These issues were submitted:

1. Did defendant company negligently fail to transmit and deliver the telegram, as alleged in the complaint? Answer: Yes.

2. If the telegram had been delivered without unnecessary delay, could and would the plaintiff have attended the funeral of Lillie Hicks? Answer: Yes.

3. What damage, if any, is plaintiff entitled to recover of defendant? Answer: $500.

From the judgment rendered, the defendant appealed.


We have examined the record and considered the assignment of error of the defendant, and are unable to find any substantial error committed which warrants us in directing another trial.

The cause seems to have been tried in line with the settled principles laid down in the decisions of this Court.

No error.

(767)


Summaries of

Dobson v. Telegraph Company

Supreme Court of North Carolina
May 1, 1910
68 S.E. 176 (N.C. 1910)
Case details for

Dobson v. Telegraph Company

Case Details

Full title:W. F. DOBSON v. W. U. TELEGRAPH COMPANY, APPELLANT

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: May 1, 1910

Citations

68 S.E. 176 (N.C. 1910)
152 N.C. 766

Citing Cases

Ullery v. Guthrie

Reversed. Cited: Smith v. Mfg. Co., 151 N.C. 262; Pegram v. Hester, 152 N.C. 766; Jones v. R. R., 153 N.C.…

Marable v. R. R

No Error. Cited: Miller v. R. R., 143 N.C. 124; Lee v. Baird, 146 N.C. 364; Suttle v. R. R., 150 N.C. 673;…