# Davis v. Southern Railway Co.

> Supreme Court of North Carolina · March 11, 1908 · 147 N.C. 68

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9809471

## Case

- **Full name:** A. H. Davis v. Southern Railway Company.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of North Carolina
- **Decided:** March 11, 1908
- **Citations:** 147 N.C. 68; 60 S.E. 722; 1908 N.C. LEXIS 16
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by OlaeK
- **Judges:** Waleer, Olaek
- **Cited by:** 9 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9809471

## Opinion text

OlaeK, C. J.,
concurring in result: The form of the issue, “What damage (or what amount), if any, is the plaintiff entitled to recover ?” has been so long used and in so many different kinds of actions, and its meaning is so well understood, that the advisability of now calling it in question is doubtful. It could only add to the number of issues, without any corresponding benefit.
When, as in this case, more than one inference can be drawn from the evidence, a charge to the jury, “If you believe the evidence, answer the issue ‘Yes’ (or ‘No/ as the case may be),” is erroneous. But when only one inference can be drawn such charge would be correct. The long-settled practice is thus summed up by Brown, J., in a recent case (Clark v. Traction Co., 138 N. C., 80 ), where, speaking for a unanimous Court, he says: “His Honor instructed the jury, ‘if *73 they believed tbe evidence, to answer that issue “Yes.” ’ In this instruction toe are unable to discover any error. The evidence in the case was practically undisputed, and we do not see how any reasonable mind can draw more than one inference from it.”

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9809471. Public record. Not legal advice.