{
  "id": 11272197,
  "name": "J. T. NEEDHAM v. SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY",
  "name_abbreviation": "Needham v. Southern Railway Co.",
  "decision_date": "1916-04-19",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "765",
  "last_page": "766",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "171 N.C. 765"
    }
  ],
  "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": "142 N. C., 563",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "168 N. C., 667",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8662403
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/168/0667-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "142 N. C., 563",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 142,
    "char_count": 1569,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.479,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.23913865248514488
    },
    "sha256": "e6f7b1f2c082f18cc95eea239a4216e203486a133cb76652a40df36b16d4a04a",
    "simhash": "1:2891cbe39a9a054f",
    "word_count": 277
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:52:28.143754+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "J. T. NEEDHAM v. SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nThe instructions to tbe jury, excepted to by tbe plaintiff, as to tbe risks assumed by a passenger upon a mixed train, are in accordance with, tbe principles laid down in Marable v. R. R., 142 N. C., 563, and in many other cases.\nTbe question discussed in tbe brief as to tbe correctness of tbe charge upon tbe burden of proof as to negligence is not presented by' any exception or assignment of error, and therefore cannot be considered.\nTbe correct rule in regard thereto is stated in Barnes v. R. R., 168 N. C., 667.\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "O. B. Snow, J. C. Buxton, and B. G. Barloes for plaintiff.",
      "W. F. Carter and Manly, Hendren & Womble for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "J. T. NEEDHAM v. SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY.\n(Filed 19 April, 1916.)\n1. Carriers of Passengers \u2014 -Mixed Trains \u2014 Assumption of Risk.\nThe rule of the risks assumed by a passenger on a mixed freight and passenger train, as laid down in Mcurable v. R. R., 142 N. C., 563, is approved.\n2. Appeal and Error \u2014 Objections and Exceptions \u2014 Assignments of Error.\nMatters discussed in briefs filed in the Supreme Court, without exception noted of record or assignment of error, will not be considered.\nAppeal by defendant from Cline, J., at August Term, 1915, of Surry.\nThis is an action by tbe plaintiff, who was a passenger upon a mixed train, to recover damages for personal injury sustained, as be alleges, by tbe negligence of tbe defendant in causing a sudden movement of tbe train.\nTbe jury answered tbe issue as to negligence in favor of tbe defendant, and from tbe judgment rendered thereon tbe plaintiff appealed.\nO. B. Snow, J. C. Buxton, and B. G. Barloes for plaintiff.\nW. F. Carter and Manly, Hendren & Womble for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0765-01",
  "first_page_order": 817,
  "last_page_order": 818
}