{
  "id": 8611495,
  "name": "S. M. UPCHURCH and PAUL H. ROBERTSON v. C. P. BUCKNER and Wife, PAULINE BUCKNER",
  "name_abbreviation": "Upchurch v. Buckner",
  "decision_date": "1955-01-14",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "411",
  "last_page": "411",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "241 N.C. 411"
    }
  ],
  "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": "72 S.E. 2d 9",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "236 N.C. 145",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8622892
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/236/0145-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "50 S.E. 2d 909",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "229 N.C. 650",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        12167417
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/229/0650-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "184 S.E. 511",
      "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": "94 S.E. 446",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "174 N.C. 658",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11255204
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/174/0658-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "64 S.E. 435",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "150 N.C. 540",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        11271902
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/150/0540-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 182,
    "char_count": 2235,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.496,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.20716304309633496
    },
    "sha256": "84dac7b8bafd0d0d045e22baadd88fc0133e1aa3827bf26bef7ef140b7b4b4c0",
    "simhash": "1:d873b27244263941",
    "word_count": 379
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:30:40.140494+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "S. M. UPCHURCH and PAUL H. ROBERTSON v. C. P. BUCKNER and Wife, PAULINE BUCKNER."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nPlaintiffs have two assignments of error: One, to tbe court\u2019s refusal to set tbe verdict aside as being against tbe greater weight of tbe evidence, and Two, to tbe signing of tbe judgment.\nTbe evidence was conflicting. Tbe motion by tbe plaintiffs to set aside tbe verdict as being against tbe greater weight of tbe evidence was one addressed to tbe sound discretion of tbe court, and no abuse of discretion being shown its refusal to grant tbe motion is not reviewable. Billings v. Observer, 150 N.C. 540, 64 S.E. 435; Hoke v. Whisnant, 174 N.C. 658, 94 S.E. 446; Anderson v. Holland, 209 N.C. 746, 184 S.E. 511; Coach Co. v. Motor Lines, 229 N.C. 650, 50 S.E. 2d 909; Poniros v. Teer Co., 236 N.C. 145, 72 S.E. 2d 9.\nAppeal dismissed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "L. J. Phipps for Plaintiffs, Appellants.",
      "Bonner D. Sawyer for Defendants, Appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "S. M. UPCHURCH and PAUL H. ROBERTSON v. C. P. BUCKNER and Wife, PAULINE BUCKNER.\n(Filed 14 January, 1955.)\nTrial \u00a7 49\u2014\nA motion to set aside tlie verdict as being against tbe greater weight of the evidence is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court, and when no abuse of discretion is shown, the court\u2019s refusal to grant the motion is not reviewable.\nAppeal by plaintiffs from McKeithen, Special Judge, May Term 1954 of OeANGE.\nCivil action to recover a balance of $1,817.67 under an alleged contract for completion of a dwelling bouse for tbe defendants.\nTbe defendants filed answer denying that they owed plaintiffs anything, and set up a cross-action asking for the recovery of $1,500.00 allegedly due them from a loan made on tbe property, and also for tbe recovery of $1,500.00 damages for alleged defective workmanship and inferior materials used in tbe construction of tbe dwelling bouse by tbe plaintiffs.\nTbe plaintiffs and the defendants offered evidence in support of tbe allegations in their pleadings.\nTbe court submitted two issues to tbe jury: One. In what amount, if any, are tbe defendants indebted to tbe plaintiffs? And Two. In what amount, if any, are tbe plaintiffs indebted to tbe defendants ? Tbe jury answered tbe first issue nothing and tbe second issue $1,500.00. Judgment was entered in accordance with the verdict.\nPlaintiffs appeal therefrom assigning error.\nL. J. Phipps for Plaintiffs, Appellants.\nBonner D. Sawyer for Defendants, Appellees."
  },
  "file_name": "0411-01",
  "first_page_order": 449,
  "last_page_order": 449
}