From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Frazier v. Wilkes

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Apr 1, 1903
43 S.E. 1004 (N.C. 1903)

Opinion

(Filed 28 April, 1903.)

Negligence — Damages — Accidents — Railroads — Personal Injuries.

No act or omission, though resulting in damage, can be deemed actionable negligence unless the one responsible could, by the exercise of ordinary care, under all the circumstances, have foreseen that it might result in damage to some one.

ACTION by A. H. Frazier against Jane R. Wilkes, heard by Shaw, J., at March Term, 1903, of MECKLENBURG. From a judgment of nonsuit, the plaintiff appealed.

Burwell Cansler and Jones Tillett for plaintiff.

Maxwell Keerans for defendant.


The facts in the case come clearly within the language of Justice Montgomery, speaking for the Court in Raiford v. R. R., 130 N.C. 597: "No act or omission, though resulting in damage, can be deemed actionable negligence unless the one responsible could, by the exercise of ordinary care, under all the circumstances, have (438) foreseen that it might result in damage to some one. " This is one of those misfortunes against which no reasonable human foresight could have made provision.

Affirmed.

WALKER, J., having been of counsel, did not sit on the hearing of this case.

Cited: Fuller v. R. R., 140 N.C. 484; Lassiter v. R. R., 150. N.C. 486.


Summaries of

Frazier v. Wilkes

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Apr 1, 1903
43 S.E. 1004 (N.C. 1903)
Case details for

Frazier v. Wilkes

Case Details

Full title:FRAZIER v. WILKES

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Apr 1, 1903

Citations

43 S.E. 1004 (N.C. 1903)
132 N.C. 437

Citing Cases

Raiford v. R. R

Error. Cited: Frazier v. Wilkes, 132 N.C. 437; Ramsbottom v. R. R., 138 N.C. 41; Fuller v. R. R., 140 N.C.…

Lassiter v. R. R

In this case a new trial was ordered, with the suggestion that a nonsuit should have been granted. Alexander…