{
  "id": 8653738,
  "name": "JOHN H. DILLARD and T. J. HILL v. HIAWASSEE RIVER POWER COMPANY",
  "name_abbreviation": "Dillard v. Hiawassee River Power Co.",
  "decision_date": "1919-01-03",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "109",
  "last_page": "109",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "177 N.C. 109"
    }
  ],
  "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": 139,
    "char_count": 1747,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.471,
    "sha256": "a7a23ec2e6ab6642a5575042d2485840692f0908c677d97730f3a4b632aa0661",
    "simhash": "1:eedbb75868fa0539",
    "word_count": 282
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:15:26.203458+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "JOHN H. DILLARD and T. J. HILL v. HIAWASSEE RIVER POWER COMPANY."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Pee Oubiam.\nThis is an action brought by the plaintiffs to recover-of the defendant for legal services rendered the defendant. The defendant, answering the complaint, averred it had paid the plaintiffs the sum of $1,800 for said services, -and that this was all their services were-reasonably worth.\nThe case was referred to J. D. Mallonee, referee, to state the account-between the. parties. The referee heard the matter and reported his findings of fact and conclusions of law to April Term, 1918, of the Superior \u2022 Court, and it was heard upon exceptions to the referee\u2019s report, before - Judge Lane. His Honor sustained all the findings and rulings of the referee and overruled all exceptions to the referee\u2019s report, as well as all objections taken by the defendant to the evidence as it was taken before \u2022 the referee and rendered judgment for plaintiffs. The defendant excepted and appealed to the Supreme Court.\nThe first thirty-nine exceptions were taken to the referee\u2019s report, to-both his findings of fact and conclusions of law, and whether these exceptions, or any of them, should be sustained, it is admitted, depends-, largely upon the consideration of the exceptions to the testimony of the \u25a0 plaintiff Hill and that of Norvell, a witness for the plaintiff, the latter-having testified as an expert.\n\"We have examined the numerous exceptions and think they cannot be-, sustained, and that it is needless to discuss them.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Pee Oubiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Witherspoon & Witherspoon and M. W. Bell for plaintiffs.",
      "J. N. Moody for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "JOHN H. DILLARD and T. J. HILL v. HIAWASSEE RIVER POWER COMPANY.\n(Filed 3 January, 1919.)\nAttorney and Client \u2014 Attorneys\u2019 Fees \u2014 Reference.\nAppeal by defendant from Lane, J., at the April Term, 1918, off CHEROKEE.\nWitherspoon & Witherspoon and M. W. Bell for plaintiffs.\nJ. N. Moody for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0109-01",
  "first_page_order": 167,
  "last_page_order": 167
}