{
  "id": 8657908,
  "name": "EDNA B. SEDBURY v. SOUTHERN EXPRESS COMPANY",
  "name_abbreviation": "Sedbury v. Southern Express Co.",
  "decision_date": "1913-09-17",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "363",
  "last_page": "364",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "164 N.C. 363"
    }
  ],
  "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": "141 N. C., 181",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 163,
    "char_count": 1875,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.447,
    "sha256": "2a22bca6e5af02d1610801d274df34524526b46a8c68e7660ad3c18b3158cdde",
    "simhash": "1:1a723e8452ed3db9",
    "word_count": 323
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:20:25.630766+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "EDNA B. SEDBURY v. SOUTHERN EXPRESS COMPANY."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nWe are unable to determine tbe questions at issue in this cause for tbe reason that tbe facts agreed upon contain no finding that tbe money was taken while tbe valise was in tbe care or control of defendant company. In its ordinary acceptation, a judgment is tbe conclusion of tbe law upon facts admitted or in some way established, and, without this essential fact, tbe Court is not in a position to make final decision on tbe rights of tbe parties. Bryant v. Insurance Co., 141 N. C., 181. Tbe cause will be remanded, that tbe determinative facts may-be established. Tbe costs will be equally divided between tbe parties.\nRemanded.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Cf. M. T. Fountain & Son for plaintiff.",
      "F. S. Spruill for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "EDNA B. SEDBURY v. SOUTHERN EXPRESS COMPANY.\n(Filed 17 September, 1913.)\nAppeal and Error \u2014 Case Agreed \u2014 Omissions\u2014Procedure\u2014Case .Remanded.\nA necessary finding in an action to recover money from an express company, alleged to bave been lost from a valise which \u2022 had been intrusted to the defendant for shipment, is that the money was taken while the valise was in the defendant\u2019s care or control, and such finding being omitted from an agreed case submitted to the Superior Court, it is remanded so that the omission may be supplied.\nAppeal from Lyon, J., at June Term, 1913, of Edgecombe.\nCivil action, beard on appeal from a justice\u2019s court. Tbe action was 'to recover tbe sum of $13 and interest, being an amount of money lost from a valise wbicb bad been intrusted witb defendant company for shipment from Fayetteville to Tarboro, N. 0., and for a penalty in failing to adjust tbe claim witbin tbe time required by law, as provided by chapter 139, Laws 1911.\nIn tbe Superior Court tbe case was submitted on case agreed upon, and judgment having been entered in plaintiff\u2019s favor for tbe claim and tbe statutory penalty, defendant excepted and appealed.\nCf. M. T. Fountain & Son for plaintiff.\nF. S. Spruill for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0363-02",
  "first_page_order": 399,
  "last_page_order": 400
}