{
  "id": 8522173,
  "name": "KENNETH H. JOHNSON v. WANDA B. GARWOOD and husband, JOHN GARWOOD; PEGGY B. NEWSOM and husband, CHARLES NEWSOM; KAYE B. MANN and husband, ROBERT LEWIS MANN",
  "name_abbreviation": "Johnson v. Garwood",
  "decision_date": "1980-11-04",
  "docket_number": "No. 8025SC387",
  "first_page": "462",
  "last_page": "463",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "49 N.C. App. 462"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C. Ct. App.",
    "id": 14983,
    "name": "North Carolina Court of Appeals"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "254 S.E. 2d 197",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1979,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "41 N.C. App. 184",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8548449
      ],
      "year": 1979,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/41/0184-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "251 S.E. 2d 443",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1979,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "296 N.C. 486",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8567731
      ],
      "year": 1979,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/296/0486-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 186,
    "char_count": 2306,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.718,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 8.506146477535682e-08,
      "percentile": 0.48667914615871427
    },
    "sha256": "9b09f90fba3f6898b71ff155cd9c3195eb12316cfbb71747d3973d5dbf5b7113",
    "simhash": "1:4552701b5d39103a",
    "word_count": 388
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:45:37.060516+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Judges Hedkick and Hill concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "KENNETH H. JOHNSON v. WANDA B. GARWOOD and husband, JOHN GARWOOD; PEGGY B. NEWSOM and husband, CHARLES NEWSOM; KAYE B. MANN and husband, ROBERT LEWIS MANN"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "ARNOLD, Judge.\nBy this purported appeal we are again presented with an attempt to appeal from an order granting a new trial solely as to the issue of damages. Such an order is interlocutory and there is no immediate right of appeal. Industries, Inc. v. Insurance Co., 296 N.C. 486, 251 S.E. 2d 443 (1979).\nWhile G.S. l-277(a) provides that \u201c[a]n appeal may be taken from every judicial order or determination .. . which grants or refuses a new trial,\u201d this Court has observed that an order granting only a partial new trial is not subject to immediate appellate review. Insurance Co. v. Dickens, 41 N.C. App. 184, 254 S.E. 2d 197 (1979). Defendant may not appeal from the order directing a new trial solely on the issue of damages.\nAppeal dismissed.\nJudges Hedkick and Hill concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "ARNOLD, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "No counsel for plaintiff appellee.",
      "Patrick, Harper & Dixon, by Stephen M. Thomas, for defendant appellants."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "KENNETH H. JOHNSON v. WANDA B. GARWOOD and husband, JOHN GARWOOD; PEGGY B. NEWSOM and husband, CHARLES NEWSOM; KAYE B. MANN and husband, ROBERT LEWIS MANN\nNo. 8025SC387\n(Filed 4 November 1980)\nAppeal and Error \u00a7 6.2- partial new trial on damages issue - no appeal\nDefendant may not appeal from an order directing a new trial solely on the issue of damages.\nAppeal by defendants from Collier, Judge. Order entered 19 November 1979 in Superior Court, Catawba County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 15 October 1980.\nThis is a civil action in which plaintiff seeks actual and punitive damages for defendants\u2019 alleged wrongful conveyance of property to a third party. Plaintiff\u2019s evidence tended to show his deed to defendants was in reality a mortgage while defendants\u2019 evidence suggested a deed absolute from plaintiff coupled with an option to repurchase. Defendants\u2019 motion for a directed verdict on the issue of punitive damages was allowed. A directed verdict was also granted dismissing the case as against defendants John Garwood, Charles Newsom, and Robert Lewis Mann. The jury returned a verdict in favor of plaintiff as to the remaining defendants, awarding $313.00 in damages. The judge set aside the damage award as being against the greater weight of the evidence and ordered a new trial as to the amount of damages only. Defendants appeal from the judge\u2019s refusal to grant a new trial as to all the issues.\nNo counsel for plaintiff appellee.\nPatrick, Harper & Dixon, by Stephen M. Thomas, for defendant appellants."
  },
  "file_name": "0462-01",
  "first_page_order": 488,
  "last_page_order": 489
}
