{
  "id": 8662217,
  "name": "N. C. HUGHES et al. v. E. R. CROOKER",
  "name_abbreviation": "Hughes v. Crooker",
  "decision_date": "1907",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "764",
  "last_page": "764",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "144 N.C. 764"
    }
  ],
  "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": 50,
    "char_count": 337,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.493,
    "sha256": "b8676193b8cf03f204cb411bb62493686f456d92a4f17c7f1387fde0bcc7934b",
    "simhash": "1:5edd044a1bc73178",
    "word_count": 58
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:27:07.773177+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "N. C. HUGHES et al. v. E. R. CROOKER."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nThe Court below, has found as a fact that the defendant is a non-resident of -North Carolina, and we find there is sufficient evidence to support such finding. The motion to dissolve the attachment was properly denied.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Ward & Grilnes for plaintiff.",
      "W. G. Hodman for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "N. C. HUGHES et al. v. E. R. CROOKER.\nWard & Grilnes for plaintiff.\nW. G. Hodman for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0764-01",
  "first_page_order": 804,
  "last_page_order": 804
}