{
  "id": 8619503,
  "name": "R. FRANK SEAY v. SENTINEL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY",
  "name_abbreviation": "Seay v. Sentinel Life Insurance",
  "decision_date": "1935-05-22",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "832",
  "last_page": "833",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "208 N.C. 832"
    }
  ],
  "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": "18 S. E., 208",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "113 N. C., 240",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8652694
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/113/0240-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "96 S. E., 977",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "176 N. C., 152",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8655469
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/176/0152-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "123 S. E., 82",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "187 N. C., 864",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8655561
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/187/0864-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "137 S. E., 137",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "193 N. C., 385",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        2217875
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/193/0385-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "159 S. E., 411",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "201 N. C., 823",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8628498,
        8628516
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/201/0823-01",
        "/nc/201/0823-02"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 156,
    "char_count": 1588,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.484,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 3.685625436184767e-07,
      "percentile": 0.892234836857284
    },
    "sha256": "549c580da81c00e5cef77158426b36626d29dbcba0e9c7db2a670f136cc7fca4",
    "simhash": "1:1978f698149c8787",
    "word_count": 277
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:53:32.811961+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "R. FRANK SEAY v. SENTINEL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Pee. CueiaM.\nThe Court being evenly divided in opinion, Glarlcson, J., not sitting, the judgment of the Superior Court is affirmed and stands, according to the uniform practice of appellate courts, as the decision in this case, without becoming a precedent. Com. Co. v. Mfg. Co., 201 N. C., 823, 159 S. E., 411; Raynor v. Ins. Co., 193 N. C., 385, 137 S. E., 137; Jenkins v. Lbr. Co., 187 N. C., 864, 123 S. E., 82; Miller v. Bank, 176 N. C., 152, 96 S. E., 977; Durham v. R. R., 113 N. C., 240, 18 S. E., 208.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Pee. CueiaM."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "J ones & Fisher for plaintiff.",
      "Roberson, Haworth & Reese for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "R. FRANK SEAY v. SENTINEL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY.\n(Filed 22 May, 1935.)\nAppeal and Error J d\u2014\nWhere the Supreme Court is evenly divided in opinion, one Justice not sitting, the judgment of the lower court will be affirmed without becoming a precedent.\nAppeal by defendant from McHlroy, J., at February Term, 1935, of Guilpokd.\nCivil action to recover agent\u2019s commissions on insurance premium renewals, \u201cpaid to and accepted by tbe (defendant) company, while tbis (agency) contract is in force . . . limit 9 years.\u201d\nTbe defendant sought to terminate its agency contract witb tbe plaintiff, prior to tbe expiration of tbe ninth renewal of some of tbe policies written by plaintiff. Tbis suit is to recover commissions on such renewals up to tbe 9th on each policy.\nJudgment of nonsuit was entered in tbe municipal court of tbe city of High Point, which was reversed on appeal to tbe Superior Court of Guilford County.\nFrom the ruling of the Superior Court the defendant appeals, assigning errors.\nJ ones & Fisher for plaintiff.\nRoberson, Haworth & Reese for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0832-01",
  "first_page_order": 898,
  "last_page_order": 899
}