{
  "id": 11255574,
  "name": "T. A. MAY v. NATIONAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY",
  "name_abbreviation": "May v. National Fire Insurance",
  "decision_date": "1916-12-22",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "795",
  "last_page": "796",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "172 N.C. 795"
    }
  ],
  "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": "159 N. C., 552",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8660248
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/159/0552-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "115 N. C., 22",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 238,
    "char_count": 3364,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.446,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.8355681364661158e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7213546040715115
    },
    "sha256": "d003c31c7cb77dae26c5cfbe3502f168b5da566ffd76c092065bb4d9b108bac5",
    "simhash": "1:9acf067898389748",
    "word_count": 566
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:21:58.562423+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "T. A. MAY v. NATIONAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "BkowN, J.\nTbe defendant bases its motion to set aside the judgment upon two grounds, viz., excusable neglect and that the circumstances under which the judgment was rendered make it irregular and void.\nWe will consider only the second ground.\nThe facts are that the Superior Court of Swain County, to which the summons in this case was returnable, convened on 6 March, 1916, Long, Judge, presiding. The complaint was filed on 7 March and the answer 18 March.\nThe judge finds \u201cthat the defendant has a good and meritorious defense to plaintiff\u2019s claim; that on 12 March, 1916, the judge presiding left the bench; that he did not adjourn the court, but left it to expire by limitation of law; that it is admitted by the attorneys for the plaintiff and found \u25a0 as a fact that the judge after so leaving the courtroom signed the judgment herein while standing in front of his boarding-house.\u201d\nPrior to thus signing the judgment, his Honor had made a general order, as follows: \u201c . . . and defendants are allowed thirty days thereafter to file answer or demur, except in those cases wherein judgments by default are taken in open court.\u201d\nA reference to the calendar will show that 12 March, 1916, was Sunday.\nWe are of opinion that the judgment was irregular, not being rendered to the due course of judicial proceedings, and voidable, if not absolutely void.\nA judgment of the Superior Court, other than strictly \u201cchambers business,\u201d can only be rendered in term, when the court is in session and the judge presiding.\nIt cannot legally be rendered on the street. When the judge leaves the bench and the term- is left to expire by limitation, the term ends then and there when the judge has finally left the bench. The judge then cannot hear motions or other matters outside of the courtroom except by consent, unless they are such matters as are cognizable at chambers. Delafield v. Construction Co., 115 N. C., 22; Hardee v. Timberlake, 159 N. C., 552.\nThe orderly course of judicial procedure requires that when the court takes a recess until a certain'hour, the crier should so announce, and when the presiding judge orders an adjournment sine die the crier should so announce, and the time of the adjournment should be entered on the minutes.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "BkowN, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Frye & Frye for plaintiff.",
      "Osborne, Codee & Robinson, John M. Robinson for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "T. A. MAY v. NATIONAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY.\n(Filed 22 December, 1916.)\n1. Courts \u2014 Terms\u2014Expiration\u2014Limitation\u2014Judgments\u2014Procedure.\nA judgment by default signed on Sunday by tbe presiding judge on tbe street, after leaving tbe bench without adjourning court, but permitting tbe term to expire by limitation, is. irregular and voidable if not absolutely void; and the action of a judge bolding a subsequent term, in setting it aside upon finding meritorious defense, will not be disturbed on appeal.\n2. Courts \u2014 Terms\u2014Expiration\u2014Limitations\u2014Motions\u2014Kecess\u2014Procedure.\nAfter leaving the bench for a term of tbe Superior Court to expire by limitation, tbe judge cannot bear motions or other matters outside of tbe courtroom except by consent, unless they are such as are cognizable at chambers. Tbe judicial procedure for recesses of court and adjournment pointed out by Brown, J.\nMotioN to set aside a judgment, heard at July Termj 1916, of Swain, before S.ardvng, J. The court set aside the judgment, and plaintiff appealed.\nFrye & Frye for plaintiff.\nOsborne, Codee & Robinson, John M. Robinson for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0795-01",
  "first_page_order": 861,
  "last_page_order": 862
}