{
  "id": 8628283,
  "name": "DOLLIE C. LUPTON, Administratrix, v. M. S. HAWKINS et al.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Lupton v. Hawkins",
  "decision_date": "1936-11-04",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "658",
  "last_page": "659",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "210 N.C. 658"
    }
  ],
  "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., 734",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "203 N. C., 601",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8616433
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/203/0601-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "169 S. E., 281",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "204 N. C., 654",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8623439
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/204/0654-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "166 S. E., 732",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "203 N. C,. 631",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8616858
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/203/0631-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "65 S. E., 762",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "151 N. C., 652",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8655847
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/151/0652-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "166 S. E., 733",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "203 N. C., 556",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8615236
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/203/0556-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "165 S. E., 358",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "203 N. C., 191",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8604176
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/203/0191-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 197,
    "char_count": 2696,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.509,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.334044466989411e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6297212694639726
    },
    "sha256": "ff65d3466c6b257c82911eab95c59b861002e939b3a558dcf2d30416b8c8e521",
    "simhash": "1:1543289f65bc4758",
    "word_count": 467
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:57:05.250790+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "DOLLIE C. LUPTON, Administratrix, v. M. S. HAWKINS et al."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Stacy, C. J.\nThe Court is without jurisdiction to entertain the appeal, due to the defective affidavit upon which plaintiff was allowed to appeal in forma pauperis, and the same is dismissed on authority of Riggan v. Harrison, 203 N. C., 191, 165 S. E., 358; Hanna v. Timberlake, 203 N. C., 556, 166 S. E., 733; and Honeycutt v. Watkins, 151 N. C., 652, 65 S. E., 762.\nThe plaintiff does not aver in her affidavit, -as required by C. S., 649, that she \u201cis advised by counsel learned in the law that there is error in matter of law in the decision of the Superior Court in said action.\u201d The requirements of the statute are mandatory, McIntire v. McIntire, 203 N. C,. 631, 166 S. E., 732, and jurisdictional, Powell v. Moore, 204 N. C., 654, 169 S. E., 281, \u201cand unless the statute is complied with, the appeal is not in this Court, and we can take no cognizance of the case, except to dismiss it from our docket.\u201d Honeycutt v. Watkins, supra.\nThere is no authority for granting an appeal in forma pauperis without proper, supporting affidavit. Powell v. Moore, supra; S. v. Stafford, 203 N. C., 601, 166 S. E., 734.\nAppeal dismissed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Stacy, C. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Ward & Ward for plaintiff, appellant.",
      "Moore & Moore for defendants, appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "DOLLIE C. LUPTON, Administratrix, v. M. S. HAWKINS et al.\n(Filed 4 November, 1936.)\nAppeal and Error O e \u2014 Affidavit of party appealing in forma pauperis must aver that counsel have advised that there is error in law in judgment.\nThe requirements of the statute regulating appeals in forma pauperis are mandatory and jurisdictional, O. S., 649, and where the affidavit fails to aver, as required by the statute, that appellant is advised by counsel learned in the law that there is error in matter of law in the decision of the lower court, the appeal must be dismissed, nor is there authority for granting an appeal upon such affidavit.\nAukeal by plaintiff from Spears, J., at March Term, 1936, of CARTERET.\nCivil action to recover damages for death of plaintiff\u2019s intestate, alleged to have been caused by tbe wrongful act, neglect, or default of tbe defendants.\nPlaintiff\u2019s intestate was killed in a crossing accident which occurred in Morebead City on tbe afternoon of 13 April, 1935.\nAt tbe close of plaintiff\u2019s evidence, tbe court being of opinion tbat plaintiff\u2019s intestate was contributorily negligent on plaintiff\u2019s own showing, sustained tbe demurrer to tbe evidence and. dismissed tbe action as in case of nonsuit.\nPlaintiff gave notice of appeal in open court, and was allowed to appeal in forma pauperis upon certificate of counsel and affidavit tbat she \u201cis unable, by reason of her poverty, to make tbe deposit or to give tbe security required by law for said appeal.\u201d\nWard & Ward for plaintiff, appellant.\nMoore & Moore for defendants, appellees."
  },
  "file_name": "0658-01",
  "first_page_order": 724,
  "last_page_order": 725
}