{
  "id": 8657105,
  "name": "STROUD v. WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY",
  "name_abbreviation": "Stroud v. Western Union Telegraph Co.",
  "decision_date": "1903-11-03",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "253",
  "last_page": "254",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "133 N.C. 253"
    }
  ],
  "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": "128 N. C., 642",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "131 N. C., 831",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "119 N. C., 622",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8655846
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/119/0622-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "107 N. C., 68",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11272574
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/107/0068-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "106 N. C., 201",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8650975
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/106/0201-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 198,
    "char_count": 2460,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.436,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.4428949397993273e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6535523885755502
    },
    "sha256": "e00bce75e1ac004831e4a7a6b3fe88ac583545b26fd54c528b19e13584c187d5",
    "simhash": "1:88a6c4bce29bc393",
    "word_count": 439
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:14:21.840787+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "STROUD v. WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Claeic, O. J.\nThis cause was tried at June Term, 1903, of Guilford Superior Court, and by consent of the parties thirty days were allowed to serve statement of \u201ccase on appeal,\u201d and thirty days thereafter to serve counter case. The counter case was served 15th August, being within the time specified. It was thereupon the duty of the appellant, unless he accepted the counter case, to \u201cimmediately request the Judge to fix a time and place for settling the case before him.\u201d The Code, see. 550; Simmons v. Andrews, 106 N. C., 201. Tbe appellant did not accept tbe counter case, and instead of \u201cimmediately\u201d taking steps to bring tbe matter before tbe Judge that be might settle tbe case, tbe appellant took no action whatever to that end till 14th October, and shows no legal excuse for bis laches. Tbe Judge promptly settled the case on 17 th October and sent it by express to tbe appellant, but it was not docketed here on tbe morning of 20th October, as required for that district, and the appellant on the opening of Court on that day moved for a certiorari.\nTbe laches in failing to send tbe papers to tbe Judge immediately upon receipt of the counter case, and delaying to do so for two months, not being accounted for to our satisfaction, tbe motion for certiorari must be denied. Peebles v. Braswell, 107 N. C., 68; Brown v. House, 119 N. C., 622, and the counter motion to dismiss for failure to print tbe record and briefs within the time prescribed by Rule 34, 131 N. C., 831, and Rule 30, 128 N. C., 642, must be allowed.\nAppeal dismissed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Claeic, O. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Jofin A. Barringer, for the plaintiff.",
      "King & Kimball and F. H. Busbee & Son, for the defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STROUD v. WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH COMPANY.\n(Filed November 3, 1903.)\n1. APPEAL \u2014 Case on Appeal \u2014 Certiorari\u2014The Code, see. 550.\nWhere the parties fail to agree on a ease on appeal, and the appellant fails for two months to send the papers to the trial judge, the delay not being satisfactorily accounted for, a motion for certiorari to bring up the case will be denied.\n2. APPEAL \u2014 Transcript\u2014Record\u2014Supreme Court Rules SO, 34 \u2014 Rules of Practice.\nWhere the record and briefs are not printed within the time prescribed by Supreme Court Rules 30 and Si the appeal will be dismissed.\nActioN by A. Si Stroud against tbe Western Union Telegraph Company, beard by Judge W. B. Allen and a jury, at June Term, 1903, of the Superior Court of Guilpoed Cbunty. From a judgment for the plaintiff the defendant appealed.\nJofin A. Barringer, for the plaintiff.\nKing & Kimball and F. H. Busbee & Son, for the defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0253-01",
  "first_page_order": 291,
  "last_page_order": 292
}