{
  "id": 8698804,
  "name": "Anonymous",
  "name_abbreviation": "Anonymous",
  "decision_date": "1796-10",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "463",
  "last_page": "464",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "nominative",
      "cite": "1 Hayw. 463"
    },
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "2 N.C. 463"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C. Super. Ct.",
    "id": 22358,
    "name": "North Carolina Superior Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 191,
    "char_count": 2240,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.296,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.9973911702500244e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7425264947879201
    },
    "sha256": "a41940b5927990db7c89da151ddfb4ea406244d327f85709a78eb1d4e9b8e7e2",
    "simhash": "1:96755bf387fabe0f",
    "word_count": 414
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:10:25.463344+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Anonymous."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per curiam\nWju.iams absent. Whether the fifteen days are to be accounted inclusive or exclusive, depends not upon any practice, of the British courts, but upon the meaning and design of our own act, which seems to have been, that the appellee after coming to the clerk\u2019s office, and finding the appeal lodged there, might have fifteen days for travelling to the most distant part of the State, to procure attendance of witnesses, and returning lo the court, and in otherwise preparing for the trial $ but if the fifteen days are to be accounted inclusively, he will have hut thirteen days allowed for those purposes. The fifteenth day is employed in travelling to the office and getting process, and the first day of the term he must be present in court ready for his trial, if we allow one of them to be inclusive, and the other exclusive, there will remain hut fourteen days. There should be fifteen clear days\u2014 at all events, the first day of the term must be e.xcludud. The case was adjourned to search for precedents on the application of the appellant\u2019s counsel.\nNote. \u2014 Overruled, Anonymous, post 462.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per curiam"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "E contra"
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Anonymous.\nTha fifteen days before the term, in which appeals mutt be filed in the Superior Court, must b>~ clear of the day of filing the papers and of the first day of the term; at all events, of the first day of the term.\nIn this case, it was moved by General Davie, that, the appeal should not be. received, t\u00edtere nol being fifteen days between the filing of die appeal papers a;;:.\u2019 the first day of ?\u25a0 e, next term, and lie cited 2 lil. Rep. 922, 1 Sira. 407 \u2014 as a similar case being founded upon a rule of court, which had the words \u201cat least,\u201d in the sam: manner as the act of 1777, ch\u00bb 2, sec. 84, where the, expression is, that the record of the suit shall be delivered to the clerk of fiie Superior Court, at lea-<i fifteen days before, the sitting of the term. In the case in Strange, one day was |Ui]c] f0 j)e inclusive and the other exclusive ; and if that computation prevail in the present instance, the record was brought up roo late : for there are not fifteen days before the term, unless the dav of filing and the first day of the term are both included.\nE contra\nWilliams cited Salk. 599 pi. 7- 2 Stra. 765."
  },
  "file_name": "0463-01",
  "first_page_order": 469,
  "last_page_order": 470
}