{
  "id": 8662152,
  "name": "PICKETT JONES v. PIEDMONT AND NORTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY",
  "name_abbreviation": "Jones v. Piedmont & Northern Railway Co.",
  "decision_date": "1918-05-08",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "721",
  "last_page": "722",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "175 N.C. 721"
    }
  ],
  "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": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 179,
    "char_count": 2457,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.461,
    "sha256": "130951c84fcf5adb3fe6c8fb730dd14748755846c396a5ec4c1f907952ad3e39",
    "simhash": "1:90ccc860e668d1e9",
    "word_count": 404
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:50:36.007196+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "PICKETT JONES v. PIEDMONT AND NORTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Peb Cubiam :\nThe plaintiff, a boy under 21 years old, was injured while in employ of defendant as a section hand. In obedience to orders, he jumped off a loaded motor car to start it by running and pushing it and then jumping on again, when he was thrown off and injured.\nThere is sufficient evidence of negligence to justify the court in submitting the issue to the jury, and, therefore, the motion to nonsuit was properly overruled.\nThe jury found plaintiff guilty of contributory negligence and evidently considered the same in diminution of damages under the statute.\nThe four exceptions to the charge relate to the issue of negligence and are without merit. The judge submitted the case to the jury under instructions in line with the settled decisions of this Court.\nWe find\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Peb Cubiam :"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "R. C. Patrick and P. W. Garland for plaintiff.",
      "Osborne, Cocke & Robinson for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "PICKETT JONES v. PIEDMONT AND NORTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY.\n(Filed 8 May, 1918.)\nRailroads \u2014 Negligence\u2014Evidence\u2014Nonsuit\u2014Infants \u2014 Minors \u2014 Release \u2014 Damages \u2014 Comparative Negligence \u2014 Trials.\nIn this action the plaintiff, a section hand of defendant railroad company, sues to recover damages for a personal injury received by jumping off a loaded motor car, to start it by running and pushing it and then jumping thereon, under the order of the superior. There was a finding by the verdict that he signed a release during his minority, and, upon defendant\u2019s motion to nonsuit, it is held that the evidence in the case was sufficient for the determination of the jury upon the issue of defendant\u2019s actionable negligence, and also to sustain a recovery of damages under the doctrine of comparative negligence allowed by statute.\nAction, tried before Webb, J., at January Term, 1918, of Gaston, upon these issues:\n1. Did the plaintiff, Pickett Jones, sign the release and receipt offered in evidence? Answer: \u201cYes.\u201d\n2. Was the plaintiff, Pickett Jones,\u2019 21 years old when he signed the said release? Answer: \u201cNo.\u201d\n3. Did the defendant by undue advantage procure the plaintiff to sign the release offered in evidence? Answer': \u201cNo.\u201d\u2019\n4. Was the plaintiff injured by the negligence of the defendant, as alleged in the complaint ? Answer: \u201cYes.\u201d\n5. Did the plaintiff, by his own negligence, contribute to his injury, as alleged in the answer? Answer: \u201cYes.\u201d\n6. What damage, if any, is the plaintiff entitled to recover ? Answer: \u201c$166.50.\u201d\nFrom the judgment rendered defendant appealed.\nR. C. Patrick and P. W. Garland for plaintiff.\nOsborne, Cocke & Robinson for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0721-01",
  "first_page_order": 775,
  "last_page_order": 776
}