{
  "id": 8618671,
  "name": "CLARENCE McHORNEY, Admr., v. LULA M. WOOTEN, Admx., et al.",
  "name_abbreviation": "McHorney v. Wooten",
  "decision_date": "1951-09-19",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "110",
  "last_page": "111",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "234 N.C. 110"
    }
  ],
  "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": "179 S.E. 889",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "208 N.C. 245",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8601739
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/208/0245-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 177,
    "char_count": 2190,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.502,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.20719547741972602
    },
    "sha256": "f6476dbc739298e8120a05acf9670a08b904b54b548d8ee971ee3de33bccc1b6",
    "simhash": "1:8d8b071ee8c2c743",
    "word_count": 356
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:34:56.500685+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "YaleNtihe, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "CLARENCE McHORNEY, Admr., v. LULA M. WOOTEN, Admx., et al."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Stacy, C. J.\nThe judgment overruling tlie demurrers will be upheld on authority of what is said in the companion case of Barber v. Wooten, Admx., ante, 107.\nThis case affords perhaps a clearer, if not a more pronounced, distinction from the Atkins case, 208 N.C. 245, 179 S.E. 889, than does the Barber case. Here, the action is for the wrongful death of plaintiff\u2019s intestate \u2014 -the'result of the sum total of all the torts, neglects or defaults of the defendants which culminated in the right given by the \u201cLord Campbell Act.\u201d G.S. 28-173.\nThe demurrers were properly overruled.\nAffirmed.\nNote: This opinion was written in accordance with the Court\u2019s decision and filed by order of the Court after Chief Justice Stacy's death.\nYaleNtihe, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Stacy, C. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "McMullan & Aydlett for plaintiff, appellee.",
      "Frank B. Aycock, Jr., for defendant Wooten, appellant.",
      "J. Henry LeRoy for defendant Lay den, appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "CLARENCE McHORNEY, Admr., v. LULA M. WOOTEN, Admx., et al.\n(Filed 19 September, 1951.)\nDeath \u00a7 5b\u2014\nWhere death is the result of the sum total of the torts, neglects and defaults of several parties, all may be joined in the action for wrongful death. G.S. 28-173.\nThis opinion was written in accordance with the Court\u2019s decision and filed by order of the Court after Chief Justice Stacy\u2019s death.\nValentine, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.\nAppeal by defendants from Morris, J., January Term, 1951, Pasquo-tank \u2014 from Camden.\nCivil action to recover damages for the wrongful death of plaintiff\u2019s intestate, alleged to have been caused by the successive, joint and concurrent neglect or default of the defendants.\nThe facts alleged in the instant complaint in respect of the acts of negligence of the defendants are identical with those set out in the companion case of Barber v. Wooten, Admx., concurrently being decided, except here the plaintiff\u2019s intestate was the driver of the McHorney car and \u25a0only two parties defendant have been sued.\nSeparate demurrers were interposed by the defendants for misjoinder \u2022of parties and causes. Demurrers overruled; exceptions.\nThe defendants appeal, assigning errors.\nMcMullan & Aydlett for plaintiff, appellee.\nFrank B. Aycock, Jr., for defendant Wooten, appellant.\nJ. Henry LeRoy for defendant Lay den, appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0110-01",
  "first_page_order": 156,
  "last_page_order": 157
}