{
  "id": 2221581,
  "name": "CHARLES S. BRYAN v. D. P. STREET",
  "name_abbreviation": "Bryan v. Street",
  "decision_date": "1936-01-22",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "284",
  "last_page": "285",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "209 N.C. 284"
    }
  ],
  "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": "166 S. E., 316",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "203 N. C., 431",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8612339
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/203/0431-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "122 S. E, 477",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "187 N. C., 664",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8654735
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/187/0664-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "32 S. E., 677",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "124 N. C., 272",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8658938
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/124/0272-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "150 S. E., 330",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "197 N. C., 687",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8631139
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/197/0687-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 233,
    "char_count": 2906,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.494,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 7.317852702137001e-08,
      "percentile": 0.4367351146727087
    },
    "sha256": "50e73573f24dfd62f6c2994038342c7e3fac5cc5163cbc531239dc3c0d3396f1",
    "simhash": "1:d0332d096724394a",
    "word_count": 497
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:34:31.527681+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Devin, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "CHARLES S. BRYAN v. D. P. STREET."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Stacy, C. J.\n\u00a5e were told on the argument the court\u2019s ruling was based upon the belief that a landlord may not evict a tenant other than by a summary proceeding in ejectment, commenced before a justice of the peace. O. S., 2365, et seq. The law is otherwise. Ogburn v. Booker, 197 N. C., 687, 150 S. E., 330. The Superior Court has original jurisdiction of all civil actions whereof exclusive original jurisdiction is not given to some other court. C. S., 1436. \u201cIt seems that justices of the peace, as between landlords and tenants, have concurrent jurisdiction with the Superior Courts\u201d \u2014 Furches, J., in McDonald v. Ingram, 124 N. C., 272, 32 S. E., 677. See, also, Shelton v. Clinard, 187 N. C., 664, 122 S. E, 477.\nMoreover, it appears that defendant has denied plaintiff\u2019s title, controverted the allegation of tenancy, and pleaded betterments. In any event, this would seem to give the Superior Court jurisdiction. Ins. Co. v. Totten, 203 N. C., 431, 166 S. E., 316.\nBeversed.\nDevin, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Stacy, C. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "B. A. Nunn for plaintiff.",
      "D. H. Willis and Dunn & Dunn for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "CHARLES S. BRYAN v. D. P. STREET.\n(Filed 22 January, 1936.)\n1. Ejectment A b \u2014 Landlord may sue in Superior Court to eject tenant.\nA landlord may institute suit in tbe Superior Court to eject bis tenant, tbe remedy of summary ejectment before a justice of tbe peace, C. S., 2365, not being exclusive, and in sucb action the Superior Court certainly acquires jurisdiction where tbe defendant denies plaintiff\u2019s title, controverts tbe allegations of tenancy, and pleads betterments.\n2. Courts A b\u2014\nTbe Superior Court bas original jurisdiction of all civil actions whereof exclusive original jurisdiction is not given to some other court. C. S., 1436.\nDevin, J., took no part in tbe consideration or decision of this case.\nAppeal by plaintiff from Barnh\u00fcl, J., at May Term, 1935, of Craven.\nCivil action in ejectment and to recover rents.\nThe complaint alleges:\n1. That the plaintiff is the owner and entitled to the immediate possession of a lot of land in James City (description not in dispute).\n2. That the defendant rented said land from plaintiff\u2019s agent and paid rent therefor until about 30 May, 1927, since which time he has wrongfully withheld same from plaintiff, to his damage in the sum of $600, or a rental value of $8 per month.\nWherefore, plaintiff demands judgment (1) for- possession of said land, and (2) for $600.\nThe defendant denied plaintiff's title, set up claim to the premises by adverse possession, and pleaded betterments.\nAt the close of plaintiff\u2019s evidence, \u201cthe court sustained the motion for judgment as of nonsuit to that part of the cause of action which seeks a recovery of the land, and thereupon the plaintiff took a voluntary nonsuit in the action to recover rent.\u201d\nPlaintiff appeals from the involuntary part of the judgment, assigning errors.\nB. A. Nunn for plaintiff.\nD. H. Willis and Dunn & Dunn for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0284-01",
  "first_page_order": 346,
  "last_page_order": 347
}