{
  "id": 8655542,
  "name": "G. P. CONNOE v. SUNCREST LUMBER COMPANY et al.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Connoe v. Suncrest Lumber Co.",
  "decision_date": "1924-05-31",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "863",
  "last_page": "863",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "187 N.C. 863"
    }
  ],
  "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": 111,
    "char_count": 990,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.471,
    "sha256": "5df95de1cf382a93b4419ddc0ca9fb34d0f3ae88c6b457b893c49a981d2326e6",
    "simhash": "1:46dc2ccd87503de9",
    "word_count": 162
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:05:52.896945+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "G. P. CONNOE v. SUNCREST LUMBER COMPANY et al."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nUpon warmly contested issues of fact, tbe jury returned a verdict in favor of tbe plaintiff. We bave found no sufficient reason for disturbing tbe result of tbe trial. Hence' tbe verdict and judgment will be upheld.\nTbe record presents no new or novel point of law not heretofore settled by our decisions, and it would only be a work of supererogation, or \u201cthreshing over old straw,\u201d to discuss tbe exceptions, seriatim. No error has been made to appear.\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Morgan & Ward for 'plaintiff.",
      "Martin, Rollins & Wright, Alley & Alley, and Merrimon, Adams & Johnston for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "G. P. CONNOE v. SUNCREST LUMBER COMPANY et al.\n(Filed 31 May, 1924.)\nAppeal by defendant from McEl/roy, J., at February Term, 1924, of Haywood.\nCivil action to recover damages for an alleged negligent injury.\nTbe usual issues of negligence, contributory negligence and damages were submitted to tbe jury and answered by tbem in favor of tbe plaintiff. Judgment on tbe verdict. Defendant appeals.\nMorgan & Ward for 'plaintiff.\nMartin, Rollins & Wright, Alley & Alley, and Merrimon, Adams & Johnston for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0863-01",
  "first_page_order": 933,
  "last_page_order": 933
}