{
  "id": 8629792,
  "name": "COMMERCIAL CREDIT COMPANY v. J. P. RAWLEY",
  "name_abbreviation": "Commercial Credit Co. v. Rawley",
  "decision_date": "1936-12-16",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "841",
  "last_page": "841",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "210 N.C. 841"
    }
  ],
  "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": 107,
    "char_count": 1003,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.454,
    "sha256": "f891569681055c27255d9a6e6f29915690aa26a5302e3d22446c5a2db4686d2a",
    "simhash": "1:84bae035ec1ca53a",
    "word_count": 164
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:57:05.250790+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "COMMERCIAL CREDIT COMPANY v. J. P. RAWLEY."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nA careful perusal of the record leaves us with the impression that the case is free from reversible error. At least, none has been made to appear.\nThe verdict and judgment will be upheld.\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "D. Newton Farnell, Jr., for plaintiff, appellee.",
      "Dalton, Turner & Dickson for defendant, appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "COMMERCIAL CREDIT COMPANY v. J. P. RAWLEY.\n(Filed 16 December, 1936.)\nAppeal by defendant from Shaw, Emergency Judge, at September Term, 1936, of Guileobd.\nCivil action, tried upon the following issues:\n\u201c1. Is the plaintiff the owner and entitled to the possession of the automobile described in the complaint ? Answer; \u2018Yes.\u2019\n\u201c2. If so, what was the value of the automobile at the time it was taken by the defendant, as alleged in the complaint? Answer: \u2018$777.40.\u2019\n\u201c3. Is the defendant the purchaser of said automobile in controversy for value without notice of any equity in favor of the plaintiff? Answer; \u2018No.\u2019\u201d\nJudgment on the verdict, from which the defendant appeals, assigning errors.\nD. Newton Farnell, Jr., for plaintiff, appellee.\nDalton, Turner & Dickson for defendant, appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0841-01",
  "first_page_order": 907,
  "last_page_order": 907
}