{
  "id": 8652583,
  "name": "J. H. CRABTREE & CO. v. C. J. SHEELKY, et al.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Crabtree v. Sheelky",
  "decision_date": "1896-02",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "104",
  "last_page": "105",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "118 N.C. 104"
    }
  ],
  "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": "102 N. C., 347",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8649753
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/102/0347-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 104,
    "char_count": 1092,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.466,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.20760998035020575
    },
    "sha256": "7abed1f8fcbfbc77cdb1dabbfb1bce83844fb68152f1ef2b75929ef73f956413",
    "simhash": "1:8881aec35b9d7ae0",
    "word_count": 191
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:26:06.557243+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "J. H. CRABTREE & CO. v. C. J. SHEELKY, et al."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nUpon reading the affidavit and hearing the motion of defendant for a new hearing for newly discovered testimony, it is ordered in the exercise of the discretion ary power of the Court that the judgment be reversed and the sale be set aside. Brown v. Mitchell, 102 N. C., 347.\nThe suggestion is made that the court below inquire whether the true interest of all parties would not be promoted by a sale of the property in separate lots.\nNew Hearing.\nIt was held in Brown v. Mitchell, that new hearing's or new trials granted by the Appellate Court in the exercise of its \u2018discretion for newly discovered testimony would not be reported as precedents.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Mr. M. DeW. Stevenson, for plaintiffs.",
      "Messrs. O. H. Gui\u00f3n, W. D. Mclver and W. E. Clarice, for defendants (appellants)."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "J. H. CRABTREE & CO. v. C. J. SHEELKY, et al.\nNew Trial for Newly Discovered Testimony \u2014 Discretionary Power of Court to Reverse Judgment.\nCtvil aotioN, on appeal from Craven Superior Court. A motion was made in this Court that the case be remanded for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered testimony.\nMr. M. DeW. Stevenson, for plaintiffs.\nMessrs. O. H. Gui\u00f3n, W. D. Mclver and W. E. Clarice, for defendants (appellants)."
  },
  "file_name": "0104-01",
  "first_page_order": 140,
  "last_page_order": 141
}