{
  "id": 8627032,
  "name": "GEORGE W. JONES v. W. G. CANDLER et al.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Jones v. Candler",
  "decision_date": "1928-12-12",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "382",
  "last_page": "383",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "196 N.C. 382"
    }
  ],
  "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": "109 S. E., 365",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "182 N. C., 477",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8656408
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/182/0477-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 142,
    "char_count": 1476,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.484,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 8.138363859351185e-08,
      "percentile": 0.4732165852140414
    },
    "sha256": "943bebae92b6f208a1652fc0a6d1d1c1408d3bebacedfb3f6c68c619b11a6c89",
    "simhash": "1:22ff8f7c75f0851b",
    "word_count": 261
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:28:30.620798+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "GEORGE W. JONES v. W. G. CANDLER et al."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Pee Oueiam.\nGeorge W. Jones made entry to certain lands in Buncombe County under C. S., 7554, alleging the same to be vacant and unappropriated. Protest was filed by W. G. Candler, acting on behalf of himself and as agent for the heirs of Loucinda Candler, under C. S., 7557, claiming title to the whole of the lands covered by the entry.\nThe enterer offered in evidence, for the purpose of attack, two grants covering the land in controversy and under which the protestants claim title thereto. It is alleged that said grants are void because not registered within twelve months, the time prescribed in each grant for its registration. But the grants are not in the record, hence we cannot say there was error in the respect imputed.\nAppellant is required to show error; it is not presumed. In re Ross, 182 N. C., 477, 109 S. E., 365.\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Pee Oueiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Carl W. Greene for plaintiff.",
      "W. W. Candler and Fortune & Fortune for defendants."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "GEORGE W. JONES v. W. G. CANDLER et al.\n(Filed 12 December, 1928.)\n1. Appeal and Error \u2014 Record\u2014Matters Not Set Out in Record Deemed Without Error.\nMatters not set out in the record will be deemed to be without error on appeal.\n2. Appeal and Error \u2014 Review\u2014Burden of Showing Error.\nThe burden of showing error on appeal is on the appellant.\nAppeal by enterer from McElroy, J., at August Term, 1928, of Buncombe.\nProceeding of protest under tbe entry laws.\nFrom a judgment in favor of protester, the enterer, or claimant, appeals, assigning errors.\nCarl W. Greene for plaintiff.\nW. W. Candler and Fortune & Fortune for defendants."
  },
  "file_name": "0382-01",
  "first_page_order": 462,
  "last_page_order": 463
}