{
  "id": 8627449,
  "name": "S. P. HOUSER v. W. T. LOVE, J. WHITE WARE, et al.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Houser v. Love",
  "decision_date": "1935-01-28",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "592",
  "last_page": "593",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "207 N.C. 592"
    }
  ],
  "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": 138,
    "char_count": 1355,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.459,
    "sha256": "2d026a4641fb1609690aac4576145f66deeae620f64b5eff507366639e7b50cd",
    "simhash": "1:86ab9e75286aba12",
    "word_count": 239
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:17:31.653514+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "S. P. HOUSER v. W. T. LOVE, J. WHITE WARE, et al."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Pee Oubiam.\nThe judgment is affirmed upon authority of Sain v. Love, supra.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Pee Oubiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "S. J. Durham, W. E. Ghilds, W. M. Nicholson, and J. Laurence J ones for plaintiff.",
      "Clyde R. Eoey, W. C. Feimsler, A. C. J ones, D. B. Denny, B. R. Warren, and A. L. Quichel for defendants."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "S. P. HOUSER v. W. T. LOVE, J. WHITE WARE, et al.\n(Filed 28 January, 1935.)\nCivil ACTION, before Oglesby, J., at January Term, 1934. From LINCOLN.\nPlaintiff was a depositor in the Commercial Bank and Trust Company of Gastonia, and the defendants are officers and directors of said hank. The allegations of the complaint are substantially identical with those appearing in Bain et al. v. Love et al., ante, 588. The substantial difference in tbe allegations of tbe complaint in tbe two actions are perhaps found in paragraph 17 of the complaint in the case at bar. In said paragraph the plaintiff alleges that he deposited certain sums of money on 21 March, 1929, and prior to 3 April, 1929, and on 4 April, 1929, tbe day the bank was closed, and that \u201csince closing of said bank on 4 April, 1929, plaintiff has received several dividends from the liquidating agent, together with paid checks, amounting to $1,500.\u201d\nThe defendants demurred to the complaint upon the same ground as set out in the Sain case, supra. The trial judge sustained the demurrer and the plaintiff appealed.\nS. J. Durham, W. E. Ghilds, W. M. Nicholson, and J. Laurence J ones for plaintiff.\nClyde R. Eoey, W. C. Feimsler, A. C. J ones, D. B. Denny, B. R. Warren, and A. L. Quichel for defendants."
  },
  "file_name": "0592-01",
  "first_page_order": 660,
  "last_page_order": 661
}