{
  "id": 8696725,
  "name": "Livingston Isbell v. Salathiel Stone",
  "name_abbreviation": "Isbell v. Stone",
  "decision_date": "1832-12",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "410",
  "last_page": "411",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "nominative",
      "cite": "3 Dev. 410"
    },
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "14 N.C. 410"
    }
  ],
  "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": 147,
    "char_count": 1735,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.413,
    "sha256": "2cbf7e748b7c18c3104ae7962f0bc1594f30835adeb1addc1fd9461d3538e04e",
    "simhash": "1:1a6380933f6b6ce2",
    "word_count": 310
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:11:15.653835+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Livingston Isbell v. Salathiel Stone."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Daniel, Judge.\nThe case agreed by the parties, is so imperfectly made up, that we deem it improper to give an opinion upon the points made in it. If we should cometo \"the conclusion, that the plaintiff was entitled to a judgment, thecasestates no sum for which it should be entered. We cannot say, that the slave concerning whom it is alleged the defendant made a false return, is worth the sum claimed by the plaintiff. There is no verdict of the jury \u2014 no sum of money agreed by the parties that the judgment should be entered up for, in case the plaintiff should be entitled to recover. The case is imperfect in another respect; it states that Stulfs and Hauser contracted with Hm. II Sheppard for the slave in the county of Surry, but does not state whether the contract was then executed, by a delivery of the slave, or whether there was a bill of sale given in Surry, or whether the contract was barely executory. For these defects, we think the judgment should be reversed, and the case remanded.\nPer Curiam. \u2014 JudgmeNt reversed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Daniel, Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "No counsel appeared for either party,"
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Livingston Isbell v. Salathiel Stone.\nWhere judgment is rendered in tlie court below upon a case agreed,\u00bb,, which is defectively stated, it will be reversed upon appeal. '\nThis was an action on the case against the defendant, as sheriff of Stokes, for making a false return to an execution which issued at the instance of the plaintiff, against one W. H. S. The record certified to this court, contained no entry of any pleas by the defendant.\nOn the Fall Circuit of 1831, a case agreed was submitted to Danier, Judge, who gave judgment for the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed. It is not thought to be necessary to state the facts set forth in the case.\nNo counsel appeared for either party,"
  },
  "file_name": "0410-01",
  "first_page_order": 418,
  "last_page_order": 419
}