{
  "id": 8629265,
  "name": "MARGARET RUSHING BERWER, and MARGARET RUSHING BERWER, Guardian of WALTER F. RUSHING and WILLIAM A. RUSHING, Minors, v. THE UNION CENTRAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY",
  "name_abbreviation": "Berwer v. Union Central Life Insurance",
  "decision_date": "1936-12-16",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "814",
  "last_page": "815",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "210 N.C. 814"
    }
  ],
  "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": "204 N. C., 654",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8623439
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/204/0654-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "203 N. C., 556",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8615236
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/203/0556-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 162,
    "char_count": 2170,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.519,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.092449515143012e-07,
      "percentile": 0.5659540382470175
    },
    "sha256": "0d6e77d1031bc109fcf03675352356ec284990aad4f7d7ecad244f14bfb6bde4",
    "simhash": "1:45c2a99444837a0a",
    "word_count": 369
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:57:05.250790+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "MARGARET RUSHING BERWER, and MARGARET RUSHING BERWER, Guardian of WALTER F. RUSHING and WILLIAM A. RUSHING, Minors, v. THE UNION CENTRAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nThe affidavit filed in the appeal in forma pauperis is defective, in that it does not contain the averment required by O. S., 649, that appellants are \u201cadvised 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 This is a jurisdictional requirement and for that reason the appeal must be dismissed. Hanna v. Timberlake, 203 N. C., 556. See, also, an applicable discussion of this subject in Powell v. Moore, 204 N. C., 654.\nOn 16 November, 1936, the appellants made an additional affidavit containing the averment omitted from the original affidavit and on the day following obtained an additional order from the trial judge allowing them to appeal in forma pauperis. This did not cure the omission, however, for the reason that the additional affidavit was not made within the five days prescribed by C. S., 649, and for the further reason that said affidavit and order based thereon were not filed in this Court until after the date for docketing the appeal here, 10 November, 1936.\nAppeal dismissed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Robert W. Davis and 8. J. Bennett for plaintiffs, appellants.",
      "D. L. Carlton and Powell & Lewis for defendant, appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "MARGARET RUSHING BERWER, and MARGARET RUSHING BERWER, Guardian of WALTER F. RUSHING and WILLIAM A. RUSHING, Minors, v. THE UNION CENTRAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY.\n(Filed 16 December, 1936.)\nAppeal and Error C e \u2014 Defect in affidavit for appeal in forma pauperis may not be cured by supplemental affidavit filed after five-day period.\nWhere tbe jurisdictional affidavit for leave to appeal in forma pauperis fails to aver that appellant is advised by counsel learned in the law that there is error of law in the judgment, C. S., 649, the affidavit is fatally defective and the appeal must be dismissed, and the defect may not be cured by an additional affidavit filed after the expiration of the five days prescribed by the statute, or one filed after the date for docketing the appeal.\nAppeal by tbe plaintiffs from Barnhill, J., at September Term, 1936, of Columbus.\nCivil action to correct boundary in deed and to recover for rents lost by reason of error therein.\nRobert W. Davis and 8. J. Bennett for plaintiffs, appellants.\nD. L. Carlton and Powell & Lewis for defendant, appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0814-01",
  "first_page_order": 880,
  "last_page_order": 881
}