{
  "id": 2221330,
  "name": "ALVIS RICHARDSON v. J. M. EDMUNDS COMPANY",
  "name_abbreviation": "Richardson v. J. M. Edmunds Co.",
  "decision_date": "1936-01-22",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "837",
  "last_page": "837",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "209 N.C. 837"
    }
  ],
  "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": 117,
    "char_count": 980,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.52,
    "sha256": "38865d497967d02ffdb30bf0589a1448959e14339b3a5c2b09a7049283951842",
    "simhash": "1:02302e11b39b9d9a",
    "word_count": 161
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:34:31.527681+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "ALVIS RICHARDSON v. J. M. EDMUNDS COMPANY."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nThe only exceptions brought forward in appellant\u2019s brief are those relating to the charge in which it is contended the court failed to \u201cstate in a plain and correct manner the evidence given in the case,\u201d and likewise failed to \u201cdeclare and explain the law arising thereon,\u201d as required by C. S., 564. The exceptions are not of sufficient merit to call for elaboration or to warrant \u25a0 a new trial. Hence, the verdict and judgment will be upheld.\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "P. W. Glidewell and Allen H. Gwyn for plaintiff.",
      "R. T. Pickens and Dalton, Turner <& Dickson for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "ALVIS RICHARDSON v. J. M. EDMUNDS COMPANY.\n(Filed 22 January, 1936.)\nAppeal by defendant from Hill, Special Judge, at June Term, 1935, of Eockingham.\nCivil action for damages arising out of collision between two automobile trucks.\nThe usual issues of negligence, contributory negligence, and damages were submitted to the jury and answered in favor of the plaintiff.\nDefendant appeals, assigning errors.\nP. W. Glidewell and Allen H. Gwyn for plaintiff.\nR. T. Pickens and Dalton, Turner <& Dickson for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0837-01",
  "first_page_order": 899,
  "last_page_order": 899
}