{
  "id": 8657694,
  "name": "W. D. LAMM et als. v. SARAH HOLLOMAN et als.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Lamm v. Holloman",
  "decision_date": "1918-09-18",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "686",
  "last_page": "686",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "176 N.C. 686"
    }
  ],
  "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": "160 N. C., 52",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 131,
    "char_count": 1440,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.488,
    "sha256": "6369acee3acc0b426aaaf8e944ed7eda285a3bf4990ec321efb2b9a0a019bb81",
    "simhash": "1:385d7fd8b3f697cc",
    "word_count": 256
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:39:13.878101+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "W. D. LAMM et als. v. SARAH HOLLOMAN et als."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PER Cubiam.\nThe answer to the third issue is a complete bar to the right of action of the plaintiff; and as no error is alleged in the determination of that issue, it is unnecessary to consider exceptions relating to the other issues. Hamilton v. Lumber Co., 160 N. C., 52.\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PER Cubiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "TS. B. Grantham for plaintiff.",
      "Finch & Vaughan and J. Crawford Biggs for defendants."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "W. D. LAMM et als. v. SARAH HOLLOMAN et als.\n(Filed 18 September, 1918.)\nAppeal and Error \u2014 Issues\u2014Answer to One \u2014 Complete Bar \u2014 Exceptions.\nWhere appellant, ifLaintifl:, does not allege error as to an issue, the answer to which is a complete bar to his right of action, exceptions to other issues need not be considered on appeal.\nAppeal by plaintiffs from Daniels, J., at March Term, 1918, of Nash.\nThis is an action to establish a resulting trust in a certain tract of land.\nThe jury returned the following verdict:\n1. Was any part of the purchase price of the 50-acre tract of- land conveyed by deed from W. E. Lamm and wife to Griffin H. Holloman paid by the said Griffin H. Holloman out of the individual funds of his wife, Ziney Holloman? Answer: Yes.\n2. If so, what portion of the purchase money so paid was the individual property of \u2019the said Ziney ? Answer: One-fourth.\n3. Is the cause of action of the plaintiff barred by the statute of limitations? Answer: Yes.\nJudgment was rendered upon the verdict in favor of the defendants, and the plaintiff appealed.\nTS. B. Grantham for plaintiff.\nFinch & Vaughan and J. Crawford Biggs for defendants."
  },
  "file_name": "0686-01",
  "first_page_order": 738,
  "last_page_order": 738
}