{
  "id": 11269014,
  "name": "J. F. MOORE et als. v. COOPER MONUMENT COMPANY",
  "name_abbreviation": "Moore v. Cooper Monument Co.",
  "decision_date": "1914-04-01",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "211",
  "last_page": "212",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "166 N.C. 211"
    }
  ],
  "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": "112 N. C., 589",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8651517
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/112/0589-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "151 N. C., 614",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8655725
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/151/0614-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "149 N. C., 221",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11270083
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/149/0221-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "148 N. C., 315",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11269854
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/148/0315-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 180,
    "char_count": 2381,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.47,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 3.900765840664258e-07,
      "percentile": 0.9017340393204392
    },
    "sha256": "7564daea62a443c1efa93e625840d9311c56cfc50cdeb97f6d8b93f290183800",
    "simhash": "1:8c2db520010dc391",
    "word_count": 399
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:23:48.430184+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "J. F. MOORE et als. v. COOPER MONUMENT COMPANY."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Pee CubiaM.\nAs the monument has been erected, the Court will not entertain an appeal to determine the correctness of the ruling dissolving the restraining order. Harrison v. New Bern, 148 N. C., 315; Pickler v. Board of Education, 149 N. C., 221; Wallace v. Wilkesboro, 151 N. C., 614.\nWe think, however, there is error in dismissing the action and entering final judgment at the hearing in Columbus County.\nThe merits of the action were not before the court, and the sufficiency of the complaint could only be considered in determining the right to the restraining order.\nThe final judgment, except when hearings are elsewhere by consent, should be rendered in the county where the action is pending and in term. Hamilton v. Icard, 112 N. C., 589.\nModified and affirmed. The plaintiffs will pay the costs.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Pee CubiaM."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "J. B. Bellamy and J. T. Bland for plaintiffs.",
      "Robert Ruarle, E. L. Larkins, Stevens & Beasley, John J. Best, and A. McL. Graham for defendants."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "J. F. MOORE et als. v. COOPER MONUMENT COMPANY.\n(Filed 1 April, 1914.)\n1. Injunction \u2014 Restraining Order \u2014 Act Committed \u2014 Appeal and Error.\nThe correctness of a ruling dissolving a restraining order will not be considered, on appeal when it is made to appear that tbe act sought to be restrained has been committed.\n2. Injunction \u2014 Restraining Order \u2014 Trials\u2014Final Judgment \u2014 Courts \u2014T erms.\nTbe sufficiency of tbe complaint will only be considered in determining tbe right to a restraining order, when tbe controversy is not before tbe court on its merits, and tbe action may not be dismissed by final judgment until tbe trial, and, except by consent of tbe parties, this must be in term of court of the county wherein tbe action is pending.\nAppeal by plaintiffs from order of Rountree, J., given, at chambers, 24 November, 1913.\nThis is an action commenced in the Superior Court of Pen-des County to prevent the erection of a Confederate monument at the intersection of Fremont and \"Wright streets in.Burgaw, upon the ground that it would be an obstruction in the streets.\nThe plaintiffs obtained a temporary order restraining the erection of the monument, which was returnable and was heard in Columbus County.\nAt the hearing the temporary order was dissolved, and the action dismissed, and the plaintiff excepted and appealed.\nIt is admitted that since the dissolution of the restraining order the monument has been erected.\nJ. B. Bellamy and J. T. Bland for plaintiffs.\nRobert Ruarle, E. L. Larkins, Stevens & Beasley, John J. Best, and A. McL. Graham for defendants."
  },
  "file_name": "0211-01",
  "first_page_order": 253,
  "last_page_order": 254
}