majority"> *389 HoKe, J.

It bas been settled by repeated and well considered decisions of this court, that defendant company is responsible for actionable negligence of the Southern Eail-way Company, done in the operation of the road under defendant’s lease, and in the exercise of its franchise. Aycock v. Railroad, 89 N. C., 321; Logan v. Railroad, 116 N. C., 940; Harden v. Railroad, 129 N. C., 354. The Statute, chapter 56, Private Laws 1891, section 1, enacts: “That any servant or employee of any railroad company operating in this State, who shall suffer injury to his person, or the personal representative of any such servant or employee, who shall suffer death, in the course of his service or employment with said company, by the negligence, carelessness or incompetency of any other servant, employee or agent of the company, or by any defect in the machinery, ways or appliances of the company, shall be entitled to maintain an action against such company.”

One effect of this statute is to abolish, so far as railroads are concerned, the doctrine known as the fellow servant doctrine, and make the company responsible for the negligent acts of its' employees in the course of their service or employment, when by reason of such negligence, a fellow servant or other employee is injured.

We have carefully examined the record and the exceptions presented for our consideration, and find no reversible error in the charge of the court or the conduct of the trial.

The jury have accepted the version of the occurrence given by the plaintiff, and, taking this to be true, the plaintiff had a clear cause of action.

' There is no error, and the judgment below must be

Affirmed.

Citation profile

How this case has been treated — in progress