{
  "id": 8691198,
  "name": "Thomas O. Dwyer v. Henry G. Cutler",
  "name_abbreviation": "Dwyer v. Cutler",
  "decision_date": "1827-12",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "312",
  "last_page": "313",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "nominative",
      "cite": "1 Dev. 312"
    },
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "12 N.C. 312"
    }
  ],
  "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": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 167,
    "char_count": 1835,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.32,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.548627546539126e-08,
      "percentile": 0.28537262211040104
    },
    "sha256": "56bdf5f7d33a657caba34ee510f80d13973981dc49664818396592a2f53682c2",
    "simhash": "1:bfaa9dbd0696dd64",
    "word_count": 312
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:44:07.907129+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Thomas O. Dwyer v. Henry G. Cutler."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Tati,or, Chief-Justice,\nThe act of 1820, extending the jurisdiction of Justices to one hundred dollars, does not embrace this case. The words are, \u201c bonds, notes and liquidated accounts.\u201d There is a guaranty under seal, on which the sole, remedy is by an action of cove* want, in which damages would be recovered for the nonperformance of the guaranty.\nIt was certainly not the design of the act, that Magistrates should have jurisdiction of a case, in which questions are likely to arise, which it would be difficul\u00bb for them to settle. The construction of a guaranty, the extent of the obligation imposed by it, and the degree of diligence which, under the circumstances of the case, the Plaintiff' is bound to use, require the consideration of a Jury, aided by a Court qualified to instruct them.\nThere ought to be a new trial.\nPer Curiam.* \u2014 -Judgment reversed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Tati,or, Chief-Justice,"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Thomas O. Dwyer v. Henry G. Cutler.\nFrom Hertford.\nA single Magistrate has no jurisdiction of actions, founded upon a covenant of guaranty.\nThis action was originally commenced by a warrant, and was founded upon the following instrument:\n\u201c I llave 111 i.r; day transferred to Thomas 0. Dwyer, a note of Arthur Lawrence for ninety-five dollars, dated the 30th day of August last, and payable the 5tti of September, 1826, which note I guarantee unto the said Thomas O. Dwyer, or his assigns, for value received. Wit\u00bb ness my hand and seal, October 12,1826.\n\u201c HENRY 6. CUTLER.\u201d\nOn the trial, it was objected on the part of the Defendant, that a Justice of the Peace had no jurisdiction of the subject. The objection was overruled by his honor Judge Martin, and a verdict being returned for the Plaintiff, and judgment entered accordingly, the Defen-dent apdealed.\nThe case was submitted without argument by Gaston, for the Plaintiff. No Counsel appeared for the Defendant"
  },
  "file_name": "0312-01",
  "first_page_order": 312,
  "last_page_order": 313
}