{
  "id": 8621073,
  "name": "E. F. SHUTT, Administrator, v. REYNOLDS-LYBROOK FARM",
  "name_abbreviation": "Shutt v. Reynolds-Lybrook Farm",
  "decision_date": "1927-11-02",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "803",
  "last_page": "804",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "194 N.C. 803"
    }
  ],
  "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": 142,
    "char_count": 1377,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.476,
    "sha256": "96e677737b01ff22722c85b8c63992370583fb8553db08f7bf9cbf6f976414b0",
    "simhash": "1:7316a612e7c7919d",
    "word_count": 230
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:26:29.544042+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "E. F. SHUTT, Administrator, v. REYNOLDS-LYBROOK FARM."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Pee Cueiam.\nPlaintiff\u2019s intestate was the victim of an unfortunate accident, but the evidence fails to disclose any liability on the part of the defendant.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Pee Cueiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Wallace- & Wells and Benbow, Hall & Benbow for plaintiff.",
      "Manly, Hendren & Womble for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "E. F. SHUTT, Administrator, v. REYNOLDS-LYBROOK FARM.\n(Filed 2 November, 1927.)\nAppeal by plaintiff from Harding, J., at March Term, 1927, of Fobsyth.\nCivil action in tort to recover damages for the death of plaintiff\u2019s intestate, alleged to have been caused by the wrongful act, neglect or default of defendant.\nEugene Shutt, a man 34 years of age, bad worked on defendant\u2019s farm for more than seven years and had been foreman of the place about three and one-half years, when on 29 September, 1923, while disking a field with a caterpillar tractor, preparatory to sowing grain, he was mortally injured in a fall beneath the tractor as it ran too near a ditch, the bank giving way and causing the tractor to turn over.\nIt is not alleged that the tractor was defective. Plaintiff bottoms his action on the alleged circumstance of negligence in that the defendant failed to warn the deceased of the soft ground and the danger of running too near the ditch.\nAt the close of plaintiff\u2019s evidence the defendant lodged a motion for judgment as in case of nonsuit, which was allowed. Plaintiff appeals, assigning error.\nWallace- & Wells and Benbow, Hall & Benbow for plaintiff.\nManly, Hendren & Womble for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0803-02",
  "first_page_order": 871,
  "last_page_order": 872
}