{
  "id": 11271813,
  "name": "WADE MEADOWS et al. v. T. C. MANN",
  "name_abbreviation": "Meadows v. Mann",
  "decision_date": "1922-11-08",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "630",
  "last_page": "631",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "184 N.C. 630"
    }
  ],
  "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": 112,
    "char_count": 1043,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.455,
    "sha256": "6a4508e882f294b9588d127138e29f3416b4cddb21b716b86205091defd55f26",
    "simhash": "1:05db415b723b17ed",
    "word_count": 179
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:54:19.408476+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "WADE MEADOWS et al. v. T. C. MANN."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PeR Cueiam.\nTbe controversy, on trial, narrowed itself principally to tbe questions of fact, wbicb bave been settled by tbe verdict. After a careful investigation of tbe record, we bave found no ruling or action on tbe part of tbe learned judge wbicb would seem to justify a reversal or an order for a new trial. Tbe judgment will be upheld.\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PeR Cueiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Gui\u00f3n & Gui\u00f3n for plaintiffs.",
      "Mann & Marm for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "WADE MEADOWS et al. v. T. C. MANN.\n(Filed 8 November, 1922.)\nAppeal and Error \u2014 Verdict\u2014Proposition of Daw.\nThe verdict, upon conflicting evidence, determines the issue of fact, and will not be disturbed when it appears that there is no error in the application of the principles of law involved in the controversy.\nAppeax by defendant from Daniels, J., at May Term, 1922, of CRAVEN.\nCivil action to recover damages for an alleged breach of contract in the sale of seed oats.\nUpon denial of liability and issues joined, there was a verdict and judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, from which the defendant appealed, assigning errors.\nGui\u00f3n & Gui\u00f3n for plaintiffs.\nMann & Marm for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0630-01",
  "first_page_order": 686,
  "last_page_order": 687
}