{
  "id": 11275099,
  "name": "FRANCIS HARPER v. DAVID M. WILLIAMS et al.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Harper v. Williams",
  "decision_date": "1836-06",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "379",
  "last_page": "379",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "nominative",
      "cite": "1 Dev. & Bat. Eq. 379"
    },
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "21 N.C. 379"
    }
  ],
  "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": 116,
    "char_count": 1222,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.656,
    "sha256": "560bc996f80194dc4b4c350feb28c7b745b2ea30f6fb654fd92f5a7595c1d400",
    "simhash": "1:03ac51d5135bc4e9",
    "word_count": 204
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:52:55.525579+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "FRANCIS HARPER v. DAVID M. WILLIAMS et al."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Ruffin, Chief Justice;\nWe do not advert to the particular circumstances stated in the answer, on which it is insisted, that the plaintiff gave credit exclusively to his vendee personally, and that he then, or subsequently, renounced his lien; because the case must be decided against the plaintiff upon the general principle agreed on in Johnson v. Cawthorn, ante, 32. The vendor has no equitable lien, as against the vendee\u2019s creditor, who proceeds to a sale by execution,\nPer Curiam. Bill dismissed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Ruffin, Chief Justice;"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "FRANCIS HARPER v. DAVID M. WILLIAMS et al.\nJune, 1836.\nA vendor has jio equitable lien for the purchase money against, a creditor of the vendee, who claims under an.execution sale.\nThe case of Johnson v. Cawthorn, (ante page 32,) approved.\nThis was a bill filed by a vendor, to subject the land sold, to the payment of the purchase money. Many facts and circumstances were stated to strengthen the plaintiff\u2019s claim, which were strongly contested by the defendant; but which it is wholly unnecessary to state, as it was conceded that the defendant claimed under a sale made upon executions against the vendee.\nThe case was submitted, without argument, by Morde-cai for the plaintiff, and W. C. Stanly for the defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0379-01",
  "first_page_order": 387,
  "last_page_order": 387
}