¶1(For syllabus, see Hansley v. Jamesville and Washington Railroad, at this term.) Though a critical examination of the assignments of error shows that some of the instructions given to the jury and excepted to by defendant were erroneous, upon different grounds, yet we deem it best to hold that this case depends upon the principle announced in the opinion in Hansley v.R. R., ante, 602, in reference to the allowance of vindictive damages, and therefore we grant a new trial.
115 N.C. 624
20 S.E 190
Brooks v. . R. R.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided September 5, 1894
Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1894-09-05
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently February 1891
1 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1894-09-05
View the full empirical analysis of this case →