{
  "id": 8657354,
  "name": "W. E. MEWBORN v. ATLANTIC COAST LINE RAILWAY COMPANY",
  "name_abbreviation": "Mewborn v. Atlantic Coast Line Railway Co.",
  "decision_date": "1914-10-21",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "91",
  "last_page": "91",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "168 N.C. 91"
    }
  ],
  "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": 70,
    "char_count": 520,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.483,
    "sha256": "e105841477d604e1693b21972608bc2be8d7bdf24573c6f4463a5070bb3b6b24",
    "simhash": "1:503bfeca0807b39a",
    "word_count": 87
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:05:21.378028+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "W. E. MEWBORN v. ATLANTIC COAST LINE RAILWAY COMPANY."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nWe have carefully considered the record in this case, in connection with the brief of the plaintiff\u2019s counsel, which fully covers all of the questions raised, and are of opinion that there is no error. As no new legal principle is involved, it is unnecessary to discuss the questions raised.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "G. V. Oowper for plaintiff.",
      "Rouse & Land for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "W. E. MEWBORN v. ATLANTIC COAST LINE RAILWAY COMPANY.\n(Filed 21 October, 1914.)\nAppeal by plaintiff from Whedbee, J., at March Term, 1914, of LeNOIR.\nG. V. Oowper for plaintiff.\nRouse & Land for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0091-01",
  "first_page_order": 147,
  "last_page_order": 147
}