{
  "id": 8611426,
  "name": "CHARLES STRAYHORN v. THE FIDELITY BANK et al.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Strayhorn v. Fidelity Bank",
  "decision_date": "1932-10-26",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "383",
  "last_page": "384",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "203 N.C. 383"
    }
  ],
  "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": "163 S. E., 801",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "202 N. C., 642",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8627926
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/202/0642-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "161 S. E., 688",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "201 N. C., 794",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8628195
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/201/0794-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "104 S. E., 75",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "180 N. C., 109",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8653079
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/180/0109-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 156,
    "char_count": 1842,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.491,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.0766377855645895e-07,
      "percentile": 0.5611601294129503
    },
    "sha256": "c2aa2f467f6ad0e066f37df30aab59d45cf115c94e251b7e6539cb04cad56ff3",
    "simhash": "1:960316f35324dfe8",
    "word_count": 334
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:49:40.426370+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "CHARLES STRAYHORN v. THE FIDELITY BANK et al."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Stacy, C. J.\nThe questions sought to be presented are not properly before us. Thomas v. Carteret, 180 N. C., 109, 104 S. E., 75.\nSo long as the matter was in fieri, the keeping of the verdict resided in the breast of the judge, and he was at liberty, at any time during the term, in the exercise of a sound discretion, to set it aside and to award a new trial, from which ruling no appeal lies. C. S., 591; Goodman v. Goodman, 201 N. C., 794, 161 S. E., 688; Welch v. Hardware House, 202 N. C., 642, 163 S. E., 801; Smith v. Matthews, ante, 218; Bank v. Sanders, post, (Per curiam case.)\nAppeal dismissed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Stacy, C. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "B. 0. Everett for plaintiff.",
      "Fuller, Beads & Fuller for defendant hank."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "CHARLES STRAYHORN v. THE FIDELITY BANK et al.\n(Filed 26 October, 1932.)\nAppeal and Error J g \u2014 Assignments of error on trial are not presented for review where court has set aside verdict in his discretion.\nThe trial court has the power at any time during the term to set aside the verdict and grant a new trial in the exercise of his sound legal discretion, and no appeal will lie therefrom, C. S., 591, and where the court has so set aside a verdict in defendant\u2019s favor and the defendant appeals, the defendant\u2019s assignments of error in the admission of evidence and the refusal of his motion as of nonsuit are not properly presented for review, and the appeal will be dismissed.\nAppeal by defendant bank from Barnhill, J., at May Term, 1932, of Duei-iam.\nCivil action to recover value of collateral sold and proceeds used to pay the note with which it was hypothecated, and part of residue applied on a different obligation.\nThere was a verdict for the defendant upon which judgment was tendered. His Honor set the verdict aside in his discretion and ordered a new trial. Defendant appeals, assigning error in the admission of evidence and failure to nonsuit.\nB. 0. Everett for plaintiff.\nFuller, Beads & Fuller for defendant hank."
  },
  "file_name": "0383-01",
  "first_page_order": 451,
  "last_page_order": 452
}