{
  "id": 8656035,
  "name": "L. T. BYRD v. J. A. SEXTON",
  "name_abbreviation": "Byrd v. Sexton",
  "decision_date": "1912-03-20",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "596",
  "last_page": "596",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "158 N.C. 596"
    }
  ],
  "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": 101,
    "char_count": 1143,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.464,
    "sha256": "32567fd17e32b6c309094e689c2b3725dc84cf2157b0ab2fe96782e37cdd27d0",
    "simhash": "1:28d9675afc1ed3c0",
    "word_count": 200
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:45:05.014249+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "L. T. BYRD v. J. A. SEXTON."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Pee CueiaM.\nThe third assignment of error of the appellant . relates to remarks of the court criticising the counsel, and to language used by the court, which it is claimed is tantamount to an expression of opinion upon the facts, in violation of the statute. Upon the call of this appeal the counsel for the appel-lee admits to the Court that the assignment of error is well taken, and that language was used tantamount to an expression of opinion, and consents to a new trial.\nIt is, therefore, ordered that a new trial be granted.\nNew trial.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Pee CueiaM."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "R. L. Gockuin, F. F. Young, and N. A. Townsend for plaintiff.",
      "D. H. McLean & Son and J. G. Clifford for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "L. T. BYRD v. J. A. SEXTON.\n(Filed 20 March, 1912.)\nAppeal and Error \u2014 Criticism of Counsel \u2014 Expression of Opinion.\nIt being admitted by the parties to. this appeal that the trial judge criticised counsel in language tantamount t\u00f3 an expression of opinion, in violation of the statute, a new trial is ordered.\nAjppeal from Peebles, J., at November Term, 1911,' of Hart-NETT.\nCivil action. Certain issues were submitted to the jury, who returned a verdict in favor of the defendant.\nR. L. Gockuin, F. F. Young, and N. A. Townsend for plaintiff.\nD. H. McLean & Son and J. G. Clifford for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0596-01",
  "first_page_order": 640,
  "last_page_order": 640
}