{
  "id": 8628651,
  "name": "MRS. KATHLEEN MAY SUITER (Widow) and MARY JOSEPHINE SUITER (Daughter) of JOSEPH E. SUITER (Deceased), v. SWIFT & COMPANY FERTILIZER WORKS (Employer), and SECURITY MUTUAL CASUALTY COMPANY (Carrier)",
  "name_abbreviation": "Suiter v. Swift & Co. Fertilizer Works",
  "decision_date": "1942-06-05",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "541",
  "last_page": "542",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "221 N.C. 541"
    }
  ],
  "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": 128,
    "char_count": 1333,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.469,
    "sha256": "acfb03e39433b205bd3d42029aa6144e748bb324375856a26883dfd8fa521326",
    "simhash": "1:c433519ea62d758d",
    "word_count": 210
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:01:36.695844+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "MRS. KATHLEEN MAY SUITER (Widow) and MARY JOSEPHINE SUITER (Daughter) of JOSEPH E. SUITER (Deceased), v. SWIFT & COMPANY FERTILIZER WORKS (Employer), and SECURITY MUTUAL CASUALTY COMPANY (Carrier)."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "'Per Curiam.\nTbe appeal was from a judgment of tbe Superior Court affirming an award made to tbe plaintiffs by tbe North Carolina Industrial Commission as compensation under tbe Workmen\u2019s Compensation Act for tbe death of Joseph E. Suiter.\nThe defendants admitted the employment, but claimed that Suiter was an independent contractor and, moreover, if an employee within the terms of the Act, that he was not at the time of his death engaged in the duties of such employment.\nUpon the hearing of the matter, the Court divided three to three, Justice Schenclc not sitting.\nUnder the Rule of Court, the judgment of the court below stands affirmed, and this decision does not become a precedent.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "'Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Long <& Grew and McMullan & McMuTlan for plaintiffs, appellees.",
      "Hughes, Little \u25a0<& Seawell and Allsbrooh <& Benton for defendants, appellants."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "MRS. KATHLEEN MAY SUITER (Widow) and MARY JOSEPHINE SUITER (Daughter) of JOSEPH E. SUITER (Deceased), v. SWIFT & COMPANY FERTILIZER WORKS (Employer), and SECURITY MUTUAL CASUALTY COMPANY (Carrier).\n(Filed 5 June, 1942.)\nAppeal and Error \u00a7 38\u2014\nWlien tlie Supreme Court is evenly divided in opinion, one Justice not sitting, the judgment of the lower court will be affirmed without becoming a precedent.\nAppeal by defendants from Johnson, Special Judge, at October Term, 1941, of Halifax.\nLong <& Grew and McMullan & McMuTlan for plaintiffs, appellees.\nHughes, Little \u25a0<& Seawell and Allsbrooh <& Benton for defendants, appellants."
  },
  "file_name": "0541-02",
  "first_page_order": 577,
  "last_page_order": 578
}