{
  "id": 8649709,
  "name": "L. D. GULLEY v. WILLIS COLE",
  "name_abbreviation": "Gulley v. Cole",
  "decision_date": "1889-02",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "333",
  "last_page": "333",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "102 N.C. 333"
    }
  ],
  "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": "96 N. C., 447",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8650557
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/96/0447-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 142,
    "char_count": 1683,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.514,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 3.1386179980419764e-07,
      "percentile": 0.8618873146658357
    },
    "sha256": "7ad37d25f403d9e78ddd500da2274d5c19f124625cf1fa2e7b44253336dcf46f",
    "simhash": "1:038d2934ad0b8dac",
    "word_count": 298
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:04:58.286883+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "L. D. GULLEY v. WILLIS COLE."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mebbjmox, J.\n(after stating the case). The Court .properly decided that the attempt to value and lay off the homestead of the defendant in the same land a second time was void \u2014 not upon the ground upon which the Court based its judgment, but because the homestead, as at first laid off, was effectual, continued to be so, and could not be disturbed by a re-valuation thereof and laying it off a second time. This Court so expressly decided in the defendants appeal in this case. Gulley v. Cole, 96 N. C., 447. That case is conclusive of this, and we need not do more than cite it.\nJudgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mebbjmox, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Messrs. E. W. Kerr and N. Y. Gulley, for the plaintiff.",
      "\u25a0Messrs. Strong, Gray & Stamps, C. B. Aycock and W. R. Allen, for the defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "L. D. GULLEY v. WILLIS COLE.\nHomestead \u2014 Re-allotment of.\nWhere the homestead has once been regularly laid of, it cannot be disturbed by a re-valuation thereof, or laying it off a second time.\nThis was an appeal by the defendant from an allotment of homestead, made to him under execution in favor of the plaintiff, tried at October Term, 1885, of Wayne Superior Court, before Clark, J., and a jury.\nIn 1879, the homestead of the defendant was duly valued and laid off to him. Thereafter the plaintiff obtained a judgment against him, sued out an execution upon the same, and under this execution the Sheriff proceeded to have valued and laid off the defendant's homestead in the same land, as if no homestead had ever theretofore been laid off to him.\nThe Court below held that the homestead, as valued and laid off the second time, was affected with such irregularities as rendered it void. The plaintiff excepted, and appealed to-this Court.\nMessrs. E. W. Kerr and N. Y. Gulley, for the plaintiff.\n\u25a0Messrs. Strong, Gray & Stamps, C. B. Aycock and W. R. Allen, for the defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0333-01",
  "first_page_order": 355,
  "last_page_order": 355
}