{
  "id": 8631916,
  "name": "FRANCES P. BOSTWICK v. L. B. JACKSON",
  "name_abbreviation": "Bostwick v. Jackson",
  "decision_date": "1929-06-12",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "785",
  "last_page": "786",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "197 N.C. 785"
    }
  ],
  "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": 94,
    "char_count": 956,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.488,
    "sha256": "0030b5ea06f7b1621f35628229ccfd638fce8bcb5f44fcd17ba4ea601abccfe8",
    "simhash": "1:83c91ea9b14bb435",
    "word_count": 162
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:27:44.780576+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "FRANCES P. BOSTWICK v. L. B. JACKSON."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nDefendant\u2019s assignments of error on bis appeal to this Court are based on exceptions to instructions in the charge of the court to the jury, and to the failure of the court to comply in the charge with the provisions of O. S., 564. They cannot be sustained. The judgment is affirmed.\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Roberts, Young & Lane for plaintiff.",
      "Thomm S. Rollins for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "FRANCES P. BOSTWICK v. L. B. JACKSON.\n(Filed 12 June, 1929.)\nAppeal by defendant from Sinlc, Special Judge, at May Special Term, 1928, of Buncombe.\nNo error.\nAction to recover for services rendered by plaintiff to defendant under a contract of employment. Tbe controversy involves only tbe amount which plaintiff is entitled to recover of defendant, who admits that be is indebted to plaintiff for services in tbe sum of $1,200. Plaintiff contends that defendant is indebted to her in tbe sum of $1,800.\nFrom judgment on an adverse verdict defendant appealed to tbe Supreme Court.\nRoberts, Young & Lane for plaintiff.\nThomm S. Rollins for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0785-02",
  "first_page_order": 849,
  "last_page_order": 850
}