{
  "id": 8621348,
  "name": "In Re Assessment by the CORPORATION COMMISSION Against the Stockholders of the BANK OF ROSE HILL, GURNEY P. HOOD, Commissioner of Banks, BANK OF ROSE HILL, the BANK OF DUPLIN, J. C. WILLIAMS, CHARLES TEACHEY, MAURY WARD, D. W. FUSSELL, HENRY FUSSELL, D. B. HERRING, G. W. BONEY, et al.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Assessment by the Corp. Commission v. Stockholders of the Bank of Rose Hill",
  "decision_date": "1932-06-29",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "840",
  "last_page": "841",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "203 N.C. 840"
    }
  ],
  "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": "199 N. C., 586",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8609942
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/199/0586-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 110,
    "char_count": 1281,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.472,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.20721169458142155
    },
    "sha256": "47acdfd07677a6e248486e9f212f589bd6531311b382219de8c3490e3935157a",
    "simhash": "1:09f80ee3e407d5d0",
    "word_count": 211
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:49:40.426370+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "In Re Assessment by the CORPORATION COMMISSION Against the Stockholders of the BANK OF ROSE HILL, GURNEY P. HOOD, Commissioner of Banks, BANK OF ROSE HILL, the BANK OF DUPLIN, J. C. WILLIAMS, CHARLES TEACHEY, MAURY WARD, D. W. FUSSELL, HENRY FUSSELL, D. B. HERRING, G. W. BONEY, et al."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nThe only exception and assignment of error on the part of the appealing stockholders, is to the judgment sustaining the demurrers and dismissing the stockholders\u2019 appeal and declaring the assessment on the stockholders valid. We think this is error and the judgment should be reversed. From the pleadings as they now appear of record, we think that all matters in controversy should be settled in this action and all the rights of the appealing stockholders heard and determined. Such amendments to the pleadings as are necessary to the complete determination of this action, should be allowed. As to the question of jurisdiction, see Corporation Commission v. Bank, 199 N. C., 586. The judgment below is\nBeversed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Geo. R. Ward for Gurney P. Hood, Commissioner of Banks, ex rel. Bank of Rose Hill and Bank of Duplin.",
      "Butler & Butler for appealing stockholder's."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "In Re Assessment by the CORPORATION COMMISSION Against the Stockholders of the BANK OF ROSE HILL, GURNEY P. HOOD, Commissioner of Banks, BANK OF ROSE HILL, the BANK OF DUPLIN, J. C. WILLIAMS, CHARLES TEACHEY, MAURY WARD, D. W. FUSSELL, HENRY FUSSELL, D. B. HERRING, G. W. BONEY, et al.\n(Filed 29 June, 1932.)\nAppeal by stockholders, petitioners, from Grady, J., at December Term, 1931, of DupliN.\nReversed.\nGeo. R. Ward for Gurney P. Hood, Commissioner of Banks, ex rel. Bank of Rose Hill and Bank of Duplin.\nButler & Butler for appealing stockholder's."
  },
  "file_name": "0840-01",
  "first_page_order": 908,
  "last_page_order": 909
}