{
  "id": 8617201,
  "name": "MARVIN WADE COMPANY v. H. V. STEWART",
  "name_abbreviation": "Marvin Wade Co. v. Stewart",
  "decision_date": "1925-09-23",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "854",
  "last_page": "854",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "190 N.C. 854"
    }
  ],
  "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": [
    {
      "cite": "188 N. C., 789",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8655000
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/188/0789-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "189 N. C., 250",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8653954
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/189/0250-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 111,
    "char_count": 971,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.49,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.2071902647606096
    },
    "sha256": "88e8620dbb1689efc986eabb8ba3e70da05869cd408f348d166a91c01d298916",
    "simhash": "1:199c357590e114b2",
    "word_count": 164
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:38:29.672014+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "MARVIN WADE COMPANY v. H. V. STEWART."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nThe defendant failed to make good his allegation that the judgment, rendered in this cause, had been taken through surprise or excusable neglect. The judge finds the contrary to be true. It is also found as a fact that the defendant has no meritorious defense to the plaintiff\u2019s suit. Hence, the motion was properly denied on both grounds. Livestock Co. v. Atkinson, 189 N. C., 250; Duffer v. Brunson, 188 N. C., 789; Bartholomew v. Parrish, ante, 151.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "0. G. Barker and Clifford & Townsend for plaintiff.",
      "C. L. Guy and H. L. Godwin for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "MARVIN WADE COMPANY v. H. V. STEWART.\n(Filed 23 September, 1925.)\nAppeal by defendant from Bond, J., at Lillington, N. C., 18 May, 1925, from HarNett.\nMotion of defendant to set aside judgment, rendered in this cause at the March Special Term, 1925, on the ground that said judgment was taken, not only irregularly, but also through surprise and excus\u00e1ble neglect. Motion denied and defendant appeals.\n0. G. Barker and Clifford & Townsend for plaintiff.\nC. L. Guy and H. L. Godwin for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0854-01",
  "first_page_order": 958,
  "last_page_order": 958
}