{
  "id": 11274537,
  "name": "In the matter of James Dozier's heirs, upon the petition of James P. Hughs & wife",
  "name_abbreviation": "In re Dozier's heirs",
  "decision_date": "1827-12",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "118",
  "last_page": "119",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "nominative",
      "cite": "1 Dev. Eq. 118"
    },
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "16 N.C. 118"
    }
  ],
  "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": 137,
    "char_count": 1575,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.413,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.087085966315723e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3794493424133994
    },
    "sha256": "fd140929deb6ec21fd6dc80a66e2d7b4c4528bf67b0bf4a1827dd18c81111d5d",
    "simhash": "1:be90ea44fe196273",
    "word_count": 284
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:48:17.309620+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "In the matter of James Dozier\u2019s heirs, upon the petition of James P. Hughs & wife,"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Hair Judge\n\u2014 No doubt the money coming to the wife of Hughs, is to be considered as land. But her present husband has no better title to it than her first had. To entitle him, it is indispensable that she should be privately examined, touching her assent that he should have it; or that she bo examined in some way such as the Court shall direct,equally solemn as that prescribed upon a conveyance of her real property. When this is done, 1 see no objection to granting the prayer of the petition.\nPen Curiam.\n\u2014 Let the cause be remanded at the cost of the Petitioner,",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Hair Judge Pen Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "No Counsel appeard in this Court."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "In the matter of James Dozier\u2019s heirs, upon the petition of James P. Hughs & wife,\nFrom Currituck.\nWhere land is sold for the purpose of partition, the share of a feme covert in the proceeds, is considered as realty, and cannot be paid to her husband, except she directs it upon a private examination.\nFrom the petition and exhibits, it appeared that the lands of James Dossier had been ordered by the Court of Equity for the county of Currituck, to be sold for the purpose of partition j that one Dennis Dossier, the husband of one of the persons entitled to the proceeds, had purchased them, and that, upon the confirmation of the sale, the Master was directed to creditliis bond,given to secure the purchase-money, with the amount of his wife\u2019s share thereof. The petition then stated, that Dennis Dossier had died, and that the petitioner, James P. Hughs, had intermarried with his widow, and it prayed that the share of the wife might be paid to the present husband.\nNo Counsel appeard in this Court."
  },
  "file_name": "0118-01",
  "first_page_order": 122,
  "last_page_order": 123
}