{
  "id": 8658373,
  "name": "W. H. WHITLEY v. O. O. KAFIR et al.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Whitley v. Kafir",
  "decision_date": "1921-09-21",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "760",
  "last_page": "760",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "182 N.C. 760"
    }
  ],
  "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": 122,
    "char_count": 1152,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.468,
    "sha256": "461d098bfc5195a8cc93f9434ece6640d0ad681474e65f80a7b1770d6b32bec5",
    "simhash": "1:ce164e2727392811",
    "word_count": 188
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T14:57:09.696199+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "W. H. WHITLEY v. O. O. KAFIR et al."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Pee Cueiam.\nTbe only exception in tbe record relates to bis Honor\u2019s refusal to give one of plaintiff\u2019s special prayers for instructions. While tbe prayer, as requested, probably states a correct principle of law, as an abstract proposition, yet we think it was properly refused under tbe evidence in tbe instant case. It omitted all reference to tbe marked lines; and these should bave been considered by tbe jury, even under tbe facts stated in tbe prayer.\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Pee Cueiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "W. G. Rodman and Ward & Grimes for plaintiff.",
      "' John H. Bonner and Small, MacLean, Bragaw & 'Rodman for defendants."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "W. H. WHITLEY v. O. O. KAFIR et al.\n(Filed 21 September, 1921.)\nAppeal and Error \u2014 Instructions\u2014Evidence.\nA requested instruction, though stating a correct principle of law, is properly refused when not supported by, or in conformity with, the evidence in the case.\nAppeal by plaintiff from Allen, J., at May Term, 1921, of Beaueoet.\nAction for trespass involving tbe true location of tbe boundary line between tbe lands of plaintiff and defendants, admittedly adjoining property owners.\nFrom a verdict and judgment in favor of tbe defendants, tbe plaintiff appealed.\nW. G. Rodman and Ward & Grimes for plaintiff.\n' John H. Bonner and Small, MacLean, Bragaw & 'Rodman for defendants."
  },
  "file_name": "0760-01",
  "first_page_order": 830,
  "last_page_order": 830
}