{
  "id": 11274666,
  "name": "ADAMS & REID (medical firm) v. SOUTHERN RAILWAY CO.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Adams & Reid v. Southern Railway Co.",
  "decision_date": "1899-12-22",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "565",
  "last_page": "567",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "125 N.C. 565"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C.",
    "id": 9292,
    "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "20 L. R. A., 695",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "L.R.A.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "124 N. C., 83",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8657971
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/124/0083-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 224,
    "char_count": 2861,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.406,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.7958449772676513e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7156687513441904
    },
    "sha256": "d3cb1e94463bf096e295fb79b987d409febfdee38b4d61265534d5e4c8484535",
    "simhash": "1:cc7248a89aebe5dd",
    "word_count": 468
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:42:03.891072+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "ADAMS & REID (medical firm) v. SOUTHERN RAILWAY CO."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Paikolotii, C. J.\nThis action is to recover for professional services. On August 20, 1898, the defendant\u2019s freight train ran into a washout on the road, about 2.30 o\u2019clock a. m. A few cars passed over the washout, but seven cars in the middle of the train went down,on which were some trespassers \u2014men stealing a ride. The occurrence was a quarter of a mile from Gastonia., a station on the defendant\u2019s road. On the arrival at the station the conductor and engineer engaged the plaintiff\u2019s services to treat the injuries of some of the trespassers. At 9 o\u2019clock a. m., after the services were rendered, the station agent, in response to an inquiry received from the superintendent from the defendant\u2019s road at Charlotte, N. C., 20 miles away, received the following: \u201cSurgeons should understand we will not bear any expense in connection with injured tramps. (Signed) Eider, Superintendent.\u201d\nThis is not a question of negligence on the part of the defendant in causing the injury, but a question of the conductor\u2019s authority to employ the plaintiffs at the defendant\u2019s expense, under the circumstances. Therefore, Pearce v. Railroad, 124 N. C., 83, is not in point. The conductor has no authority to make contracts binding on his employer, outside of the scope of his employment, unless express authority is given or necessarily implied from his employment.\nThere are some emergency instances in which the conductor may engage a physician to nurse the defendant\u2019s servants or passengers, when injured, but as to trespassers on the defendant\u2019s road no such authority is found to exist.\nThe subject'is considered at length, and numerous authorities cited, in 6 Rapalgy\u2019s Digest, 392, sec. 3, and in Hanscom v. Railway Co., 20 L. R. A., 695, notes. These cases hold against the right of the plaintiffs to recover in this case.\nNothing in the record discloses the conductor\u2019s authority to bind his employer, upon the facts agreed and presented to this Court.\nJudgment reversed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Paikolotii, C. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Mr. O. F. Bason, for appellant.",
      "Mr. A. 0. Mangum, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "ADAMS & REID (medical firm) v. SOUTHERN RAILWAY CO.\n(Decided December 22, 1899.)\nRailroad Accident \u2014 Injured Tramps \u2014 Medical Treatment\u2014 Conductor\u2019s Authority.\nThere are some emergency instances in which the conductor may engage a physician to attend the company\u2019s servants or passengers, when injured; hut as to trespassers on its road, no such authority exists.\nActxoN upon a medical bill determined, upon a case agreed, by McNeill, </., at September Term, 1899, of Gaston Superior Court. Three tramps were -injured by an accident while stealing a ride on defendant\u2019s road, and the plaintiffs, a medical firm, were summoned by the conductor to attend them. They rendered the service, and sent' in their bill, which the defendant refused to pay. His Honor rendered judgment in favor of plaintiffs, and defendant appealed.\nMr. O. F. Bason, for appellant.\nMr. A. 0. Mangum, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0565-01",
  "first_page_order": 597,
  "last_page_order": 599
}