Soles v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad

*826 Pee Cueiam. Tbis ease was before us at a former term (184 N. C., 283). Tbe first appeal was from a judgment of nonsuit, entered on motion of tbe defendant at tbe close of plaintiff’s evidence, and tbis was reversed by us. We are not now permitted to review any question wbicb was then decided, as a party wbo loses in tbis Court may not bave bis ease rebeard by a second appeal. Holland v. R. R., 143 N. C., 435. "Where a judgment of nonsuit bas been Teversed, and on a second trial tbe plaintiff’s evidence is substantially tbe same as it was on tbe first bearing, tbe cause should be submitted to tbe jury, as tbe former decision bas become tbe law of tbe case, so far as tbe question of non-suit is concerned. Ray v. Veneer Co., ante, 414. Tbe exceptions relating to tbe question of assumption of risk are not materially different from those presented in Cobia v. R. R., ante, 487, and they are controlled by what is said in that case. It would only be a work of supererogation to repeat here what was said there. See, also, Reed v. Director-General, 258 U. S., 92. We bave found no reversible error on tbe record, and hence tbe validity of tbe trial must be sustained. No error.