{
  "id": 8654724,
  "name": "RAY & HARRIS v. SEABOARD AIR LINE RAILWAY COMPANY",
  "name_abbreviation": "Harris v. Seaboard Air Line Railway Co.",
  "decision_date": "1923-10-17",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "769",
  "last_page": "770",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "186 N.C. 769"
    }
  ],
  "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": 96,
    "char_count": 808,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.487,
    "sha256": "1d7cb5fbf511004844d1f07464cc4e09779fbd7a50b13bcb83f5cdd8a3ff3b39",
    "simhash": "1:8ef9b26e5611e4d8",
    "word_count": 135
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:10:30.005509+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "RAY & HARRIS v. SEABOARD AIR LINE RAILWAY COMPANY."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nA careful examination of the present record leaves us with the impression that no reversible error was committed on the trial of the cause. All the exceptions are directed to alleged errors in the charge, but we think the charge as given is in substantial compliance with the 'law bearing on the subject. No prejudicial error has been made to appear. ' \u2022\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "W. P. Horton and Siler (& Barber for plaintiffs.",
      "Long & Bell and Murray Allen for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "RAY & HARRIS v. SEABOARD AIR LINE RAILWAY COMPANY.\n(Filed 17 October, 1923.)\nAppeal by defendant from Lyon, J., at March Term, 1923, of Chatham.\nCivil action to recover damages for an alleged breach of contract in connection with the sale of certain cross-ties.\nFrom a verdict and judgment in favor of plaintiffs, the defendant appealed.\nW. P. Horton and Siler (& Barber for plaintiffs.\nLong & Bell and Murray Allen for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0769-02",
  "first_page_order": 833,
  "last_page_order": 834
}