{
  "id": 8617435,
  "name": "RUTH E. LUDWICK, Administratrix, v. SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY et al.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Ludwick v. Southern Railway Co.",
  "decision_date": "1937-12-15",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "664",
  "last_page": "665",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "212 N.C. 664"
    }
  ],
  "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": "210 N. C., 630",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8628062
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/210/0630-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "166 S. E., 396",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "203 N. C., 514",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8614481
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/203/0514-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "172 S. E., 196",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "205 N. C., 599",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8630447
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/205/0599-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "175 S. E., 92",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "206 N. C., 746",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8632837
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/206/0746-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "184 S. E., 480",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "209 N. C., 746",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        2221385,
        2221617
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/209/0746-02",
        "/nc/209/0746-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "187 S. E., 756",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "188 S. E., 78",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "210 N. C., 630",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8628062
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/210/0630-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 180,
    "char_count": 1965,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.502,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.527646540942415e-08,
      "percentile": 0.3479608270598016
    },
    "sha256": "406d0bcaeb17be4f10b3ec3c52a0ff0386d4408a2c1abd1bc8261b28989d128a",
    "simhash": "1:b869f6f5a5ed2dc9",
    "word_count": 330
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:30:43.466662+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "RUTH E. LUDWICK, Administratrix, v. SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY et al."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nAffirmed on authority of Poovey v. Hickory, 210 N. C., 630, 188 S. E., 78; Scott v. Bryan, ibid., 478, 187 S. E., 756; Hardy v. Dahl, 209 N. C., 746, 184 S. E., 480; McDonald v. Zimmerman, 206 N. C., 746, 175 S. E., 92. The Court will not undertake to chart the course of the trial, or to delimit the hearing, upon attenuate questions of pleading. Pemberton v. Greensboro, 205 N. C., 599, 172 S. E., 196; S. c., 203 N. C., 514, 166 S. E., 396.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Lovelace & Kirlcman and Charles L. Coggin for plaintiff.",
      "W. T. Joyner and Roberson, Haworth & Reese for defendants."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "RUTH E. LUDWICK, Administratrix, v. SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY et al.\n(Filed 15 December, 1937.)\nAppeal and Error \u00a7 40b\u2014\nJudgment of the Superior Court reversing the order of the municipal court granting defendant\u2019s motion to strike out allegations of the complaint as being evidentiary, is affirmed on authority of Poovey v. HicTcory, 210 N. C., 630.\nAppeal by plaintiff from Armstrong, J., at June Term, 1937, of Guilford.\nCivil action to recover damages for death of plaintiff\u2019s intestate, alleged to have been caused by the wrongful act, neglect, or default of the defendants.\nPlaintiff\u2019s cause of action arises out of a collision between an automobile, in which her intestate was riding as a guest, and defendants\u2019 passenger train at a crossing in the city of High Point.\nThe circumstances under which the collision occurred, according to plaintiff\u2019s allegations, are detailed in paragraph five of the complaint.\nThe allegations of this paragraph are denied in the answer, and, following the denial, the defendants set out the facts as they understand them.\nThere was a motion to strike out the defendants\u2019 recital of the facts as being \u201cevidentiary, irrelevant, and incompetent.\u201d This motion was allowed in the municipal'court of the city of High Point and reversed on appeal to the Superior Court of Guilford County.\nFrom this latter ruling, plaintiff appeals, assigning error.\nLovelace & Kirlcman and Charles L. Coggin for plaintiff.\nW. T. Joyner and Roberson, Haworth & Reese for defendants."
  },
  "file_name": "0664-01",
  "first_page_order": 734,
  "last_page_order": 735
}