{
  "id": 8650722,
  "name": "W. H. HUGHES, Executor of W. T. STEPHENSON, v. S. P. BOONE",
  "name_abbreviation": "Hughes v. Boone",
  "decision_date": "1888-02",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "347",
  "last_page": "348",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "100 N.C. 347"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C.",
    "id": 9292,
    "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "91 N. C., 158",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8687079
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/91/0158-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 138,
    "char_count": 1819,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.503,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.061447019797991e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3181129478977346
    },
    "sha256": "6e4d236e24f0fb955108f8cc8f7cccb0e0aae37bccb8483cf00733f3a587d6e7",
    "simhash": "1:c54f25db801effb0",
    "word_count": 328
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:59:04.640355+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "W. H. HUGHES, Executor of W. T. STEPHENSON, v. S. P. BOONE."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "MerbimoN, J.\nIt appears that S. P. Boone obtained a judgment against W. H. Hughes, executor, &c., in the Superior Court of the County of Northampton, on the 28th day of January, 1888, from which the latter appealed to this Court; \u2022but he did not docket his appeal here until the 15th of February next thereafter, so that, in the order of the call of the \u25a0docket, it could not stand for argument at the present term.\nOn the 20th of February the appellee moved to docket .\u2022and dismiss the appeal, as allowed by Rule 2, \u00a7 8, suggesting that the appellant, on purpose, failed to bring up his appeal \u25a0as promptly as he might and ought regularly to have done, the object being to delay the disposition of the appeal until .the next term of the Court.\nThe motion cannot be allowed, because the appellant had \u25a0docketed his appeal before the motion was made, Barbee v. Green, 91 N. C., 158. Moreover, the motion was not made until after the week of the term assigned to the argument of \u00a1appeals from the district from which the appeal in question came, and there was no notice of the motion to the appellant or his counsel.\nMotion denied.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "MerbimoN, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "No counsel for the plaintiff.",
      "Mr. R. B. Peebles, for the defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "W. H. HUGHES, Executor of W. T. STEPHENSON, v. S. P. BOONE.\nDismissing Appeal \u2014 Rule 2, \u00a7 8.\nJudgment was rendered in the lower Court January 28th, 1888. Defendant appealed, but did not docket his appeal in this Court, until February 15th, 1888, too late for argument at this term. On February 20th, 1888, appellee moved to dismiss the appeal under-Buie 2, \u00a7 8. The motion was refused, because not made until, after the appeal was docketed and the call of the district concluded, and no notice of the motion given appellant.\nMotioN to dismiss appeal, heard by the Court at this-Term.\nThe facts are stated in the opinion.\nNo counsel for the plaintiff.\nMr. R. B. Peebles, for the defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0347-01",
  "first_page_order": 371,
  "last_page_order": 372
}