Harper v. Atl. Coast Line R. Co
| Decision Date | 12 March 1913 |
| Citation | 77 S.E. 415,161 N.C. 451 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | HARPER v. ATLANTIC COAST LINE R. CO. |
Damages (§ 69*)—Interest—Tort Actions-Injury to Property.
Damages recovered for a tort do not, as a matter of law, bear interest until after judgment; but where the wrong is solely the destruction of property the jury may, in their discretion, allow interest on the value of the property from the date of its destruction, in addition to its actual value.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Damages, Cent. Dig. §§ 137-140; Dec. Dig. § 69.*]
Appeal from Superior Court, Duplin County; Carter, Judge.
Action by Blaney Harper against the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company. Froma judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.
These issues were submitted:
The defendant appealed.
Davis & Davis, of Wilmington, for appellant.
H. D. Williams, of Kenansville, for appellee.
The only error assigned is to the following charge:
Damages recovered for a tort do not, as a matter of law, bear interest until after judgment; but when the tort consists solely in the destruction of property, and not in personal injuries, this court has held that the jury may, in their discretion, give interest on the value of the property destroyed from the date of its destruction, in addition to the actual value of the property. Rippey v. Miller, 46 N. C. 480, 62 Am. Dec. 177; Guano Co. v. Magee, 86 N. C. 351; Williams v. Lumber Co., 118 N. C. 928, 24 S. E. 800; Lance v. Butler, 135 N. C. 419, 47 S. E. 488; Stephenson v. Koonce, 103 N. C. 266, 9 S. E. 315; Wilson v. Troy, 135 N. Y. 96, 32 N. E. 44, 18 L. R. A. 449, 31 Am. St. Rep. 817, and notes.
No error.
*.For other cases see same topic and section NUMBER in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key-No. Series & Rep'r Indexes
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mintz v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.
...future losses is to be included in the verdict. Penny v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., supra; 15 Am.Jur. 579. See Harper v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., 161 N.C. 451, 77 S.E. 415, for a different rule in respect of interest when action is to recover for property As a matter of precaution and t......
-
Yancey v. North Carolina State Highway and Public Works Commission
... ... Howell v ... Seaboard Air Line R. R., 186 N.C. 239, 119 S.E. 198; ... Rawls & Tingle v. Norfolk Southern ... Acme Mfg. Co. v. McQueen, 189 N.C. 311, 127 ... S.E. 246; Harper v. Atlantic Coast Line R. R., 161 ... N.C. 451, 77 S.E. 415. There was no ... ...
-
Royal Ins. Co v. Atl. Coast Line R. Co
...for the tortious or wrongful destruction of property, do not, as a matter of law, bear interest until after judgment. Harper v. R. Co., 161 N. C. 451, 77 S. E. 415; Devereux v. Burgwin, 33 N. C. 490; Rippey v. Miller, 46 N. C. 480, 62 Am. Dec. 177; Patapsco Guano Co. v. Magee, 86 N. C. 351;......
-
Hoke v. Tilley
...judgment must be sustained as the action is in tort to recover damages, and not in contract. The principle is stated in Harper v. Railroad, 161 N. C. 451, 77 S. E. 415, as follows: "Damages recovered for a tort do not, as a matter of law, bear interest until after judgment, but when the tor......