{
  "id": 8621546,
  "name": "LILLIE T. OETTINGER et al. v. CITY OF KINSTON",
  "name_abbreviation": "Oettinger v. City of Kinston",
  "decision_date": "1932-10-12",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "846",
  "last_page": "846",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "203 N.C. 846"
    }
  ],
  "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": "96 S. E., 45",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "175 N. C., 574",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8661003
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/175/0574-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "140 S. E., 71",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "194 N. C., 450",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8611392
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/194/0450-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 116,
    "char_count": 1024,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.462,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.20721401131880662
    },
    "sha256": "d4d8810e23b519f6f95821e7c645cb417e7e165d3f2f3c6512a6f2a00618f5b4",
    "simhash": "1:7e5b20cc36bf7309",
    "word_count": 173
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:49:40.426370+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "LILLIE T. OETTINGER et al. v. CITY OF KINSTON."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nA careful perusal of the record leaves us with the impression that the ease has been tried in substantial conformity to the decisions apposite, and that no reversible error has been made to appear.\nThe law on the subject has been settled in a number of cases, notably Gore v. Wilmington, 194 N. C., 450, 140 S. E., 71, and Yowmans v. Hendersonville, 175 N. C., 574, 96 S. E., 45.\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Wallace & White and Dawson & Jones for plaintiffs.",
      "Sutton \u25a0<& Greene for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "LILLIE T. OETTINGER et al. v. CITY OF KINSTON.\n(Filed 12 October, 1932.)\nAppeal by defendant from Sinclair, J., at February Term, 1932, of LeNOIE.\nCivil action tried upon the following issues:\n\u201c1. \"Was the injury and damage to plaintiffs\u2019 property caused by the unlawful acts or omissions of the defendant, as alleged in the complaint ? Answer: Yes.\n2. What damage, if any, have the plaintiffs sustained by reason of such unlawful acts or omissions? Answer: $2,000.\u201d\nFrom judgment on the verdict, the defendant appeals, assigning errors.\nWallace & White and Dawson & Jones for plaintiffs.\nSutton \u25a0<& Greene for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0846-01",
  "first_page_order": 914,
  "last_page_order": 914
}