{
  "id": 8690825,
  "name": "Benjamin Bullock v. Edward Bullock Ex'r. of Micajah Bullock",
  "name_abbreviation": "Bullock v. Bullock",
  "decision_date": "1831-12",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "260",
  "last_page": "260",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "nominative",
      "cite": "3 Dev. 260"
    },
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "14 N.C. 260"
    }
  ],
  "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": 106,
    "char_count": 1337,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.449,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.655320440165167e-07,
      "percentile": 0.9274560022611357
    },
    "sha256": "654e90ee2495f193de0fb7a4586161742465030172a9c76b5c7d3ebce11fd3e2",
    "simhash": "1:9e227eb71b1196f8",
    "word_count": 224
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:11:15.653835+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Benjamin Bullock v. Edward Bullock Ex\u2019r. of Micajah Bullock."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Ruepin, Judge.\nThe court is precluded from considering the judge\u2019s charge by the verdjet on the general issue. It is found by the jury that the defendant\u2019s testator did not assume ; which puts the other issue, on the statute of limitations, and the instructions of the Superior Court on it out of the question. As the existence of the debt is negatived, the judgment must of course be affirmed: To this Morisey v. Bunting, (ante 1 vol. 3,) besides other cases, is a direct authority.\nPer Curiam.--\u2018Judgment appirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Ruepin, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Bevereux, for the plaintiff.",
      "No counsel appeared for the defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Benjamin Bullock v. Edward Bullock Ex\u2019r. of Micajah Bullock.\nWhere non assumpsit and the statute of limitations are pleaded, and the jury find the general issue for the defendant, this court will, not examine the charg-e of the judge on the plea of the statute.\nThe case of Morisey v.. Bunting, (ante 1 ml. 3,) approved.\nThis was an action of assumpsit, tried at Granville, on the last circuit, before Norwood, Judge.\nPleas \u2014 general issue .and the statute of limitations. The plaintiff excepted to the charge of the judge upon the plea of the statute of limitations. The jury returned the following verdict: \u201c that the defendant\u2019s testator did not assume.\u201d Upon this verdict judgment was rendered for the defendant, from which the plaintiff appealed.\nBevereux, for the plaintiff.\nNo counsel appeared for the defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0260-01",
  "first_page_order": 266,
  "last_page_order": 266
}