{
  "id": 12126508,
  "name": "COX versus DOVE, a free negro",
  "name_abbreviation": "Cox v. Dove",
  "decision_date": "1796-03",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "43",
  "last_page": "43",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "nominative",
      "cite": "1 Mart. 43"
    },
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "1 N.C. 43"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C. Super. Ct.",
    "id": 22358,
    "name": "North Carolina Superior Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 137,
    "char_count": 1381,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.585,
    "sha256": "5f708babe5f0ef156cc503636cc0e2a9b9ee52e9c74c88c955fdc9c70184beb0",
    "simhash": "1:9d427cc53aae2ae4",
    "word_count": 244
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:17:01.495884+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "COX versus DOVE, a free negro."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "The Court,\nHaywood, J. and Stone, J.\nnevertheless permitted the letter to be read: on the authority of a case cited out of Buller\u2019s Nisi Prius, 90. Hatton & Neale, per Jones, C. J. 1683.\nThe plaintiff proved a trespass committed by cutting timber, and had a verdict.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Haywood, J. and Stone, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Slade, for the defendant,",
      "Martin, for the plaintiff,"
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Newbern,\nMarch Term, 1796.\nCOX versus DOVE, a free negro.\nTRESPASS To clausum fregit, and non culpabilis pleaded. To prove the entry, a negro slave was called and offered to be sworn.\nBut, the Court [Williams, J. saying he never heard such a thing asked: Haywood, J. tacente] refused to admit the witness; although the defendant was stated to be a negro, 2, 1777, 2, 42, 307.\nThe case of The State vs. George, ante, p, 40, was cited: but much argument was not offered by the plaintiff\u2019s counsel; there being other witness, attending to prove the fact intended to have been proved by the slave. He having been offered only to come at the opinion of the judges.\nSlade, for the defendant,\noffered to read in evidence, a letter from the plaintiff to the defendant authorising him to send surpentine trees on the premises.\nMartin, for the plaintiff,\nobjected to this: on the ground that if the defendant meant to avail himself of the plaintiff\u2019s licence, he ought not to have denied the entry, which he had done by pleading non culpabilis; at all events he ought to have pleaded indentification. He cited Co. Litt. 282"
  },
  "file_name": "0043-01",
  "first_page_order": 51,
  "last_page_order": 51
}