{
  "id": 8621347,
  "name": "F. E. McCASKILL v. LORENZO McCASKILL et al., Administrators",
  "name_abbreviation": "McCaskill v. McCaskill",
  "decision_date": "1927-12-07",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "812",
  "last_page": "812",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "194 N.C. 812"
    }
  ],
  "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": 1552,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.473,
    "sha256": "440451711d931b5826dbcf486a17ac2ab5ef9ff4df3352234501ca196fb50b2a",
    "simhash": "1:a702b1ee186b00eb",
    "word_count": 250
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:26:29.544042+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "F. E. McCASKILL v. LORENZO McCASKILL et al., Administrators."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nThe controversy on trial narrowed itself to issues of fact, determinable alone by a jury. No reversible error has been made to appear on any of appellants\u2019 exceptive assignments of error. The verdict and judgment, therefore, will not be disturbed.\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "B. S. Hurley and Brittain, Brittain & Brittain for plaintiff.",
      "B. T. Poole cmd H. F. Seawell & Son for defendants."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "F. E. McCASKILL v. LORENZO McCASKILL et al., Administrators.\n(Filed 7 December, 1927.)\nAppeal by defendants from Schenclc, J., at June Special Term, 1921, of MONTGOMERY.\nCivil action brought by Florence E. McCaskill against the administrators of her father\u2019s estate to recover on contract or quantum meruit for services rendered defendants\u2019 intestate over a period of three years immediately prior to his death.\nUpon denial of liability and a counterclaim set up for board and lodging of plaintiff\u2019s three small children during the time she was at defendants\u2019 intestate\u2019s home, the jury returned the following verdict:\n\u201c1. What amount, if any, is the plaintiff, F. E. McCaskill, entitled to recover of the defendants, J. 0. McCaskill et al., administrators of A. E. McCaskill, deceased? A. $1,620.\n\u201c2. \"What amount, if any, are the defendants, J. C. McCaskill et al., administrators of A. B. McCaskill, deceased, entitled to recover of the plaintiff, F. E. McCaskill? Answer: $864.\u201d\nFrom a judgment on the verdict in favor of plaintiff for the difference between the amounts set down as answers to the first and second issues, the defendants appeal, assigning errors.\nB. S. Hurley and Brittain, Brittain & Brittain for plaintiff.\nB. T. Poole cmd H. F. Seawell & Son for defendants."
  },
  "file_name": "0812-01",
  "first_page_order": 880,
  "last_page_order": 880
}