{
  "id": 8630237,
  "name": "M. D. TEW v. LEONA HINSON, Administratrix of LULA LEE, Deceased",
  "name_abbreviation": "Tew v. Hinson",
  "decision_date": "1939-04-19",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "456",
  "last_page": "458",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "215 N.C. 456"
    }
  ],
  "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": "97 S. E., 625",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "176 N. C., 629",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8657352
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/176/0629-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "120 S. E., 194",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "186 N. C., 559",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8654219
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/186/0559-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "125 S. E., 1",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "188 N. C., 514",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8654332
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/188/0514-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "139 S. E., 696",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "194 N. C., 346",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8607559
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/194/0346-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "147 S. E., 731",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "196 N. C., 425",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8627361
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/196/0425-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "171 S. E., 358",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "205 N. C., 343",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8628625
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/205/0343-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 259,
    "char_count": 4195,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.509,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.20733235798689423
    },
    "sha256": "12aeac3137b86571a1d3a09f4d06fa7561c0d366b495d45f5afbde7b6914bbe7",
    "simhash": "1:7b595961d05038ca",
    "word_count": 728
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:25:15.554902+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "M. D. TEW v. LEONA HINSON, Administratrix of LULA LEE, Deceased."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "DeviN, J.\nThe appellant assigns as error the ruling of the court below that all the items in bis account except one were barred by the statute of limitations. It was admitted that the services for which claim was made were rendered, and all taxes (except one item) were paid, more than three years before the death of the intestate, but plaintiff contends that this was a mutual, open and current account between him and decedent, and that by virtue of C. S., 421, the cause of action accrued only from the last item on the account, which was a credit for rent within the three years\u2019 period. The evidence, however, shows that plaintiff alone kept an account of bis charges against the decedent for services rendered, and that be entered thereon from time to time credits for rent of land. These facts are insufficient to invoke the rule as to mutual, open and current accounts, or to prevent the running of the statute from the date of each item. Supply Co. v. Banks, 205 N. C., 343, 171 S. E., 358; Phillips v. Penland, 196 N. C., 425, 147 S. E., 731; Brock v. Franck, 194 N. C., 346, 139 S. E., 696; McKinnie v. Wester, 188 N. C., 514, 125 S. E., 1; Wood v. Wood, 186 N. C., 559, 120 S. E., 194; Hollingsworth v. Allen, 176 N. C., 629, 97 S. E., 625.\nThe court instructed the jury that the only item on plaintiff\u2019s claim not barred was one of $3.20. However, it appears that there was another item of $21.10 for taxes paid in October, 1933. This not being denied should have been allowed plaintiff.\nThe judgment must be modified to add to plaintiff\u2019s recovery the sum of $21.70 with interest from October, 1933. Except as hereby modified the judgment of the Superior Court is affirmed.\nModified and affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "DeviN, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Butler & Butler for plaintiff.",
      "P. D. Herring for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "M. D. TEW v. LEONA HINSON, Administratrix of LULA LEE, Deceased.\n(Filed 19 April, 1939.)\nLimitation of Actions \u00a7 3b \u2014 Facts held insufficient to establish mutual, open, and current accounts, and statute began to run from date of each item.\nPlaintiff instituted this action against the administratrix of deceased to recover for services rendered deceased, and it appeared that plaintiff alone kept the account of charges for such services and that he entered thereon from time to time credits for rent for decedent\u2019s land. Held: The facts are insufficient to establish mutual, open, and current accounts, O. S., 421, and the statute of limitations began to run against plaintiff\u2019s claims from the date of each item, but the judgment of the lower court is modified to include an item which was not denied, for taxes paid within three years prior to the death of deceased.\nAppeal by plaintiff from Grady, J., at September Term, 1938, of SampsoN.\nModified and affirmed.\nPlaintiff instituted his action to recover for services rendered defendant\u2019s intestate, Lula Lee. Plaintiff filed a statement of account showing amounts charged for his services from 1924 to 1932, and for amounts expended by bim for taxes, and on this statement be credited defendant witb rent of decedent\u2019s land at tbe rate of $80.00 per annum up to and including tbe year 1936. Lula Lee died March, 1936.\nDefendant pleaded tbe statute of limitations as to plaintiff\u2019s action, and also set up counterclaim for rent of land and for waste alleged to have been committed tbereon by tbe plaintiff.\nTbe court below ruled tbat all items charged on plaintiff\u2019s account which did not accrue within three years of tbe death of defendant\u2019s intestate were barred by tbe statute of limitations, and instructed tbe jury tbat tbe only item not barred was $3.20 paid by plaintiff for premiums on tbe burial association policy of decedent. Tbe court also held, and so charged tbe jury, tbat defendant was entitled to recover of plaintiff rent of tbe land for three years at tbe admitted rate of $80.00 per annum. It also appeared on plaintiff\u2019s account tbat be bad paid taxes on tbe land in October, 1933, in tbe sum of $21.70. This was not denied.\nTbe jury answered tbe issues in conformity witb tbe rulings of tbe court, and from judgment limiting plaintiff\u2019s recovery to $3.20, and allowing defendant judgment against the plaintiff for $240.00, tbe plaintiff appealed.\nButler & Butler for plaintiff.\nP. D. Herring for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0456-01",
  "first_page_order": 522,
  "last_page_order": 524
}