{
  "id": 8653309,
  "name": "BATTLE et al. v. MERCER et al.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Battle v. Mercer",
  "decision_date": "1924-06-21",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "116",
  "last_page": "117",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "188 N.C. 116"
    }
  ],
  "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": 192,
    "char_count": 2176,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.465,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.616107924094294e-07,
      "percentile": 0.8208797115198608
    },
    "sha256": "ddb946618ed373ca2b5bb16a929218225cfb193e3eeb76d349044b7d6b920f31",
    "simhash": "1:69633ccd9714056e",
    "word_count": 373
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:44:41.585516+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "BATTLE et al. v. MERCER et al."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Stacy, J.\nTbe circumstances of tbis case bave caused a most critical and searching examination of tbe petition to rehear. It is tbe policy of our law to give every litigant full and ample opportunity to be beard. Tbis tbe petitioning defendants bave bad in tbe instant suit; and if they bave lost any rights, it must be attributed to their own laches and want of attention in looking after their case. Tbe adjective law is not to be enforced harshly or oppressively, but rather in a spirit of liberality, to tbe end tbat justice may be administered in all cases. But tbis does not mean tbat procedural statutes will be construed by tbe courts in a manner so as to favor tbe negligent and penalize tbe diligent party. Yigilantibus et non dormientibus subvenit lex: \u201cTbe law comes to tbe assistance of tbe diligent, and not to those who sleep upon their rights.\u201d When litigants resort to tbe judiciary for tbe settlement of their disputes they are invoking a public agency, and they should not forget that rules of procedure are necessary, and must be observed, in. order to enable the courts properly to discharge their duties.\nThere are no sufficient facts and circumstances appearing in the original case or in the petition to rehear to warrant a reasonable assurance that the petitioning defendants would secure any substantial relief even if the petition were allowed. Nothing on the record was overlooked when the case was originally heard.\nThe petition to rehear must be denied.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Stacy, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "0. P. Dickinson for petitioners."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "BATTLE et al. v. MERCER et al.\n(Filed 21 June, 1924.)\nAppeal and Error \u2014 Rehearing\u2014Laches\u2014Procedure\u2014Rules of Court.\nA petition to rehear a case in the Supreme Court will not be granted when the alleged error is attributable solely to the petitioner\u2019s own laches or want of attention in looking after his case or he has neglected to follow the rules of procedure necessary to a proper presentment thereof, and especially when there is nothing to warrant the assurance that substantial relief would otherwise be afforded him.\nPetitioN by Mary S. Mercer and Margaret M. Tilgbman to rebear tbis case, reported in 187 N. 0., 436, where tbe facts are fully stated.\n0. P. Dickinson for petitioners."
  },
  "file_name": "0116-01",
  "first_page_order": 186,
  "last_page_order": 187
}