{
  "id": 8559988,
  "name": "MONROE C. CLARK v. OTIS SHERRILL and SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY",
  "name_abbreviation": "Clark v. Sherrill",
  "decision_date": "1963-04-10",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "254",
  "last_page": "255",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "259 N.C. 254"
    }
  ],
  "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": 212,
    "char_count": 2730,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.483,
    "sha256": "31225f271cfb086fa1dcfe82f09a48efaeff949921e389626648a8bd04fcf9ec",
    "simhash": "1:1706cda19505ea61",
    "word_count": 451
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:55:17.750134+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "MONROE C. CLARK v. OTIS SHERRILL and SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nThe evidence disclosed the track in the direction from which the train approached was straight for a distance of 700 feet to 1,500 feet, according to which of the plaintiff\u2019s witnesses made the estimate. The plaintiff testified the track was concealed by a bank and weeds to within 75 feet of the crossing. However, the evidence disclosed the obstruction above the road and above the rails varied from about two feet near the crossing to four feet near the curve. While the plaintiff\u2019s evidence is to the effect that the tracks were obstructed, there is no evidence from which it may be inferred the obstruction along the tracks interfered with a view of an approaching freight train. According to all the evidence, the plaintiff\u2019s failure to see the approaching train in the bright sunlight was his own fault. Contributory negligence appears as matter of law. The judgment of nonsuit is\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "White & Crumpler, by James G. White, Leslie G. Frye, Harrell Powell, Jr., for plaintiff appellant.",
      "W. T. Joyner and Womble, Carlyle, Sandridge & Rice, by W. P. Sandridge, C. F. Vance, Jr., for defendants appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "MONROE C. CLARK v. OTIS SHERRILL and SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY.\n(Filed 10 April 1963.)\nRailroads \u00a7 5\u2014\nEvidence tending to show that plaintiff was injured when defendant\u2019s train collided with plaintiff\u2019s truck on a clear day at a grade crossing where the track was straight for 700 feet in the direction from which the train approached, is held to show contributory negligence as a matter of law on the part of plaintiff, notwithstanding evidence that plaintiff\u2019s view of the track was obstructed by weeds, there being no evidence from which it might have been inferred that the obstruction along the track was sufficient to. hide materially the view of an approaching train.\nAppeal by plaintiff from Gambill, J., November 19, 1962 Term, Foesyth Superior Court.\nCivil action to recover for injuries plaintiff received in a grade crossing collision between his pickup truck, as he drove west on Fork Church Road, and the corporate defendant\u2019s south-bound train near the village of Bixby in Davie County. The collision occurred a few minutes after nine o\u2019clock on the morning of February 2, 1959. The weather was clear. The sun was shining. The hard surface of the Fork Church Road at the crossing was 23 feet wide, smooth and level with the rails.\nThe cause .of action was based on negligence in maintaining the right of way and in failure to give notice of the train\u2019s approach. The defendant denied negligence and conditionally pleaded contributory negligence as a defense.\nAt the conclusion of the plaintiff\u2019s evidence the court entered judgment of involuntary nonsuit, from which the plaintiff appealed.\nWhite & Crumpler, by James G. White, Leslie G. Frye, Harrell Powell, Jr., for plaintiff appellant.\nW. T. Joyner and Womble, Carlyle, Sandridge & Rice, by W. P. Sandridge, C. F. Vance, Jr., for defendants appellees."
  },
  "file_name": "0254-01",
  "first_page_order": 298,
  "last_page_order": 299
}