{
  "id": 11273485,
  "name": "State on the relation of R. S. McCALL v. W. W. ZACHARY",
  "name_abbreviation": "State ex rel. McCall v. Zachary",
  "decision_date": "1899-11-21",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "249",
  "last_page": "250",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "125 N.C. 249"
    }
  ],
  "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": 112,
    "char_count": 1267,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.431,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.087085966315723e-08,
      "percentile": 0.37942965014562624
    },
    "sha256": "407f1201d6c562c9945fbacd03d07cb8cf10a87d67739d6485d4684f4965aa40",
    "simhash": "1:b4937828470230e2",
    "word_count": 222
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:42:03.891072+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "State on the relation of R. S. McCALL v. W. W. ZACHARY."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "FuRCirEs, J.\nWe have carefully examined tbe facts of this case and find them to be substantially tbe same as those in McCall v. Webb, at tbis term. Tbis being so, tbe opinion of the Court in that case must govern our judgment in tbis case.\nTbe plaintiff is therefore entitled to tbe office sued for, it being the solicitorship of the Criminal Court of Madison County, and to tbe fees and emoluments thereof; and tbe defendant, Zachary, is not entitled to tbe same, nor to tbe fees and emoluments of said office. Let tbe writ issue as prayed for.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "FuRCirEs, J."
      },
      {
        "text": "Clark, J.,\ndissents for reason given in the dissenting opinions in McCall v. Webb and Abbott v. Beddingfield, at tbis term.",
        "type": "dissent",
        "author": "Clark, J.,"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Mr. George A. Shuford, for appellant.",
      "Messrs. V. 8. Lush and Franh Carter, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "State on the relation of R. S. McCALL v. W. W. ZACHARY.\n(Decided November 21, 1899.)\nQuo Warranto \u2014 Solicitor\u2014Title to Office \u2014 Madison County.\nTub plaintiff sues for the office of Solicitor of Criminal Court of Madison County, and at July Term, 1899, of the Superior Court of Madtsokt County, judgment was rendered in bis favor by Coble, J. Defendant appealed.\nTbe decision of tbis cause, according to tbe opinion, is governed by tbe judgment in McCall v. Webb, at tbis term.\nClark, J., dissents.\nMr. George A. Shuford, for appellant.\nMessrs. V. 8. Lush and Franh Carter, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0249-01",
  "first_page_order": 281,
  "last_page_order": 282
}