{
  "id": 11269640,
  "name": "C. T. PEELE v. I. G. POWELL, Administratrix",
  "name_abbreviation": "Peele v. Powell",
  "decision_date": "1912-12-14",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "50",
  "last_page": "50",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "161 N.C. 50"
    }
  ],
  "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": 82,
    "char_count": 802,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.494,
    "sha256": "46f273089631903071efbb6972af6f97780c7700611d4b83f4dc432977b37bdc",
    "simhash": "1:79e6e3ac55518d38",
    "word_count": 140
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T14:55:28.078438+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Bkown and Allen, JJ., dissenting."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "C. T. PEELE v. I. G. POWELL, Administratrix."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Clare, O. J.\nThis is a petition to rehear. There is no division in the Court as to the propositions of law laid down on the former hearing; but upon a fuller consideration of the facts, the majority of the Court are now of opinion that there was sufficient evidence to submit the case to a jury.\nPetition allowed.\nBkown and Allen, JJ., dissenting.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Clare, O. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "L. L. Smith for plaintiff.",
      "Winston & Matthews for defendant and administrator d. b. n. and defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "C. T. PEELE v. I. G. POWELL, Administratrix.\n(Filed 14 December, 1912.)\nEvidence \u2014 Questions for Jury.\nUpon a rehearing of this case it is held that the rules of law heretofore laid down are correct; but upon reconsidering the facts, the majority of the Court hold the evidence sufficient to be submitted to the juiy.\nBrown and Allen, JJ., dissenting.\nL. L. Smith for plaintiff.\nWinston & Matthews for defendant and administrator d. b. n. and defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0050-01",
  "first_page_order": 94,
  "last_page_order": 94
}