{
  "id": 8652427,
  "name": "ARTHUR FORD, Administrator, v. PIGEON RIVER LUMBER COMPANY",
  "name_abbreviation": "Ford v. Pigeon River Lumber Co.",
  "decision_date": "1911-05-31",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "352",
  "last_page": "353",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "155 N.C. 352"
    }
  ],
  "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": "117 N. C., 515",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8653579
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/117/0515-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "144 N. C., 26",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8658407
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/144/0026-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "141 N. C., 594",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11253720
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/141/0594-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "131 N. C., 653",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 171,
    "char_count": 2224,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.455,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.7528658214135748e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7087822494670538
    },
    "sha256": "16031e475fd43225e4243ad0823bc478fc274f7d22e3ab4eacaef94240dd91d2",
    "simhash": "1:c1a63d7cf7878c0e",
    "word_count": 392
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:21:07.457528+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "ARTHUR FORD, Administrator, v. PIGEON RIVER LUMBER COMPANY."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "BeowN, J.\nTbe summons was returnable to September Term, 1910, at wbicb term an order was made in tbis cause as follows: \u201cPlaintiff allowed forty days to file complaint; defendant bas forty days to file answer.\u201d Tbe defendant did not except to tbis order and did not move to dismiss tbe action for failure to file complaint, as it bad a right to do.\nIt may be, as contended by defendant, that a petition for removal need not be presented until tbe complaint is filed, and tbe record then discloses a removable controversy as to tbe sum demanded, but under our decisions tbe defendant bas waived bis right to remove and submitted itself to tbe jurisdiction of tbe court by not excepting to tbe order we have quoted.\nBy failing to except to it, tbe defendant is taken to have consented to it. Lewis v. Steamboat Co., 131 N. C., 653; Bryson v. R. R., 141 N. C., 594; Garrett v. Bean, 144 N. C., 26.\nWhere an order of reference is made in a cause, and it is not excepted to and tbe exception noted on tbe record, it is taken to be a reference by consent, upon tbe principle that \u201csilence speaks consent,\u201d and a jury trial is thereby waived. Driller Co. v. Worth, 117 N. C., 515.\nUpon same principle, wben tbe defendant tabes no- exception to tbe order extending tbe time witbin wbicb to file complaint and answer, tbe order is a consent order and voluntary submission by defendant to tbe jurisdiction of tbe court and a waiver of a right to remove.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "BeowN, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "S. Brown Shepherd and Q. W. Ferguson for plaintiff.",
      "Moore & Rollins for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "ARTHUR FORD, Administrator, v. PIGEON RIVER LUMBER COMPANY.\n(Filed 31 May, 1911.)\nRemoval of Causes \u2014 Time for Filing Pleadings \u2014 Exceptions \u2014 Waiver \u2014 implied Consent to Jurisdiction.\nThe right of removal of a cause from the State to the Federal courts is waived by not excepting to an order extending the time to file pleadings, for in not excepting the defendant is deemed to have consented to the jurisdiction of the former court.\nAppeal from Chine, J., at tbe January Term, 1911, of Hat-wood.\nPetition for removal to Circuit Court of tbe United States from Superior Court of Haywood County, bis Honor, Judge Cline, presiding.\nFrom an order denying- tbe petition defendant appealed.\nS. Brown Shepherd and Q. W. Ferguson for plaintiff.\nMoore & Rollins for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0352-01",
  "first_page_order": 388,
  "last_page_order": 389
}