{
  "id": 8621663,
  "name": "DONOVAN GRIFFIN v. J. W. BAKER",
  "name_abbreviation": "Griffin v. Baker",
  "decision_date": "1926-10-13",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "297",
  "last_page": "298",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "192 N.C. 297"
    }
  ],
  "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": "143 N. C., 54",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8656126
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/143/0054-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "138 N. C., 174",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11268984
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/138/0174-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "135 N. C., 73",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8658370
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/135/0073-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 177,
    "char_count": 2159,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.509,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.1305464776904367e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7657239862246795
    },
    "sha256": "b443c0ac2e1213322e1e6ba5b7298518432e7ed2bb05a37e8c503c9eac6495f3",
    "simhash": "1:7a4bc7601e7be31a",
    "word_count": 383
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:52:38.190415+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "DONOVAN GRIFFIN v. J. W. BAKER."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nTwo causes of action are relied on by plaintiff: (1) Libel; (2) Abuse of the process of the court. The defendant demurred.\nA demurrer to a pleading admits the facts stated therein for the purpose of passing upon the questions raised by demurrer. On demurrer a complaint will be sustained if its allegations constitute a cause of action or if facts sufficient for this purpose are logically inferable therefrom under a liberal construction of its terms.\n1 R. C. L., p. 102, defines Abuse of Process: \u201cAbuse of legal process consists in the malicious misuse or misapplication of that process to accomplish some purpose not warranted or commanded by the writ. In brief, it is the malicious perversion of a regularly issued process whereby a result not lawfully or properly attainable under it is secured.\u201d\n\u201cThere is malicious abuse of process where a party under process legally and properly issued employs it wrongfully and unlawfully, and not for the purpose it is intended by law to affect.\u201d Stanford v. Grocery Co., 143 N. C., at p. 422; Jackson v. Telegraph Co., 139 N. C., p. 347; R. R. v. Hardware Co., 135 N. C., 73; S. c., 138 N. C., 174; S. c., 143 N. C., 54.\nThe rule is well established that where a general demurrer is filed to a petition as a whole, if any count of the pleading is good and states a cause of action, a demurrer should be overruled, and the same rule governs as to demurrers to defenses. 21 R. C. L., sec. 77.\nThe complaint states a cause of action for abuse of process. On the record it is unnecessary to discuss the question of libel.\nFor the reasons given the judgment is\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "W. H. Yarborough and Ben T. Holden for plaintiff.",
      "Thomas W. Ruffin for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "DONOVAN GRIFFIN v. J. W. BAKER.\n(Filed 13 October, 1926.)\n1. Pleadings \u2014 Demurrer.\nDemurrer to complaint in an action for abuse of process will not be upheld if any part of the pleadings liberally construed will sustain the action.\n3. Process \u2014 Actions\u2014Abuse of Process.\nAbuse of process is the unlawful use of the process regularly issued, in proper form, from the court.\nAppeal by defendant from Bond, J., at August Term, 1926, of FeankliN. Affirmed.\nW. H. Yarborough and Ben T. Holden for plaintiff.\nThomas W. Ruffin for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0297-01",
  "first_page_order": 371,
  "last_page_order": 372
}