{
  "id": 8656765,
  "name": "J. H. HILL et al. v. A. W. AMAN et al.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Hill v. Aman",
  "decision_date": "1921-03-16",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "483",
  "last_page": "483",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "181 N.C. 483"
    }
  ],
  "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": 144,
    "char_count": 1590,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.47,
    "sha256": "3e60bca6a874b1f2526c04a7dfd1d52e99de9d716039fdd4d6a3318a9c0ab919",
    "simhash": "1:744715eb34a44a26",
    "word_count": 273
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:46:48.388810+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "J. H. HILL et al. v. A. W. AMAN et al."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Pee CuRIam.\nThere are only three assignments of error in tbe record: (1) That tbe court erred in not setting aside tbe findings of fact by tbe referee; (2) that tbe court erred in not sustaining the defendant\u2019s first exception to tbe referee\u2019s finding of fact; and, (3) that tbe court erred in not sustaining tbe defendant\u2019s first exception to tbe referee\u2019s conclusion of law. While these assignments of error appear in tbe record, they do not seem to have been brought forward in defendant\u2019s brief; and, therefore, are deemed to be abandoned under Rule 34. Notwithstanding this irregularity, we have examined tbe record and find no error of which tbe defendant can justly complain.\nTbe controversy was largely one of fact. It appears upon tbe face of tbe record that tbe case was beard with care and with due regard for tbe rights of tbe parties.\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Pee CuRIam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Grady & Graham and H. F. Faison for plaintiff J. H. Hill.",
      "Butler & Herring and John D. Kerr, Sr., for defendant Aman."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "J. H. HILL et al. v. A. W. AMAN et al.\n(Filed 16 March, 1921.)\nAppeal and Error \u2014 Objections and Exceptions \u2014 Briefs.\nAppellant\u2019s exceptions of record, not brought forward in his brief, are deemed abandoned in the Supreme Court. Buie 34.\nAppeal by defendant Aman from Connor, J., at September Term, 1920, of SampsoN.\nCivil action, tried upon exceptions to report of referee. Upon tbe bearing bis Honor modified tbe findings of tbe referee in some particulars, and as tbus amended tbe same was adopted and approved and judgment entered tbereon in favor of tbe plaintiff. Defendant A. W. Aman excepted and appealed.\nGrady & Graham and H. F. Faison for plaintiff J. H. Hill.\nButler & Herring and John D. Kerr, Sr., for defendant Aman."
  },
  "file_name": "0483-01",
  "first_page_order": 535,
  "last_page_order": 535
}