{
  "id": 8628671,
  "name": "J. S. AYERS and JESSE KEEL, Trading as J. S. AYERS AND COMPANY, v. LAWRENCE BOWEN and MILLIE J. BOWEN",
  "name_abbreviation": "Ayers v. Bowen",
  "decision_date": "1931-10-21",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "829",
  "last_page": "830",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "201 N.C. 829"
    }
  ],
  "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": 89,
    "char_count": 944,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.45,
    "sha256": "b50e38ba79f7f3c1b06dcc66b0a7c33eebf9a8826a3d19925ac3600155d5c65d",
    "simhash": "1:e7e0320a4a1195e9",
    "word_count": 152
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:25:15.863450+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "J. S. AYERS and JESSE KEEL, Trading as J. S. AYERS AND COMPANY, v. LAWRENCE BOWEN and MILLIE J. BOWEN."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Pee, Cueiam.\nThe evidence is conflicting and uncertain, and while the testimony of the defendant is susceptible of more than one interpretation, the jury accepted the defendant\u2019s version of the controversy, and the verdict and judgment thereon is determinative of the rights of the parties.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Pee, Cueiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Jos. W. Bailey for plaintiff.",
      "B. A. Griicher for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "J. S. AYERS and JESSE KEEL, Trading as J. S. AYERS AND COMPANY, v. LAWRENCE BOWEN and MILLIE J. BOWEN.\n(Filed 21 October, 1931.)\nCivil ACTION, before Harris, J., at March Term, 1931, of MaetiN.\nThis action was instituted by the plaintiff as a claim and delivery action for certain personal property. The defendant pleaded a general denial and counterclaim. The pleadings filed by the parties resulted in an action for accounting. Issues were submitted to the jury and answered in favor of defendant. There was judgment for defendant upon the counterclaim and the plaintiff appealed.\nJos. W. Bailey for plaintiff.\nB. A. Griicher for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0829-01",
  "first_page_order": 903,
  "last_page_order": 904
}