{
  "id": 8615395,
  "name": "F. C. PARKER, SR., and F. C. PARKER, JR., Trading as F. C. PARKER & SON, a Partnership, v. D. M. ROBERSON and ETHEL ROBERSON",
  "name_abbreviation": "Parker v. Roberson",
  "decision_date": "1955-03-09",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "612",
  "last_page": "613",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "241 N.C. 612"
    }
  ],
  "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": "40 S.E. 2d 799",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "227 N.C. 105",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8621582
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/227/0105-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "1 S.E. 2d 350",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "215 N.C. 100",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8628324
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/215/0100-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 189,
    "char_count": 2620,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.471,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.2071792602580305
    },
    "sha256": "488f2821957742fad10fbd721fddb39c3207096773c1cac57e50f0db2e637fbc",
    "simhash": "1:dabfa10d578a574e",
    "word_count": 439
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:30:40.140494+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Barnhill, C. J., and DeviN, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "F. C. PARKER, SR., and F. C. PARKER, JR., Trading as F. C. PARKER & SON, a Partnership, v. D. M. ROBERSON and ETHEL ROBERSON."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\n\u201cThe rule that a judgment is in fieri during the term only and cannot be altered after adjournment relates to judicial and not to clerical errors therein.\u201d Land Bank v. Davis, 215 N.C. 100, 1 S.E. 2d 350.\n\u201cThe power of the Superior Court, on motion in the cause after notice, to correct clerical errors in the judgment and to make the record speak the truth may not be denied.\u201d Land Bank v. Cherry, 227 N.C. 105, 40 S.E. 2d 799.\nThe error in the judgment entered at March Term, 1954, plainly disclosed by the record itself, is an obvious clerical error. Judge Carr\u2019s judgment was the appropriate procedure to correct such error. The assignment of error, upon which defendants\u2019 appeal is based, is wholly without merit. The judgment of Judge Carr is\nAffirmed.\nBarnhill, C. J., and DeviN, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "R. L. Coburn for plaintiffs, appellees.",
      "Peel <& Peel for defendants, appellants."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "F. C. PARKER, SR., and F. C. PARKER, JR., Trading as F. C. PARKER & SON, a Partnership, v. D. M. ROBERSON and ETHEL ROBERSON.\n(Filed 9 March, 1955.)\nJudgments \u00a7 20\u2014\nThe rule that a judgment is in fieri only during the term relates to judicial and not to clerical errors therein, and at a subsequent term another judge of the Superior Court has jurisdiction to correct an error in the judgment, which the record itself discloses to be a clerical error, in order to make the record speak the truth.\nBarnhill, C. J., and Devin, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.\nAppeal by defendants from Carr, J., December Term, 1954, of MaBTIN.\nAction to recover balance owing on promissory notes; and, ancillary thereto, claim and delivery proceedings to recover possession of personal property covered by chattel mortgage held by plaintiffs as security.\nAt September Term, 1953, after jury trial, judgment for plaintiffs was entered by Bone, J. Defendants excepted and appealed, but did not perfect their appeal.\nAt March Term, 1954, based on his finding that defendants had abandoned their appeal, Morris, J., entered judgment providing: \u201cNow, therefore, it is ordered, adjudged, and decreed that said action be dismissed, and that the plaintiffs recover their costs of the defendants, to be taxed by the Clerk.\u201d (Italics added.)\nAt December Term, 1954, Carr, J., upon motion and after notice, entered judgment, which corrected the judgment entered at March Term, 1954, by striking therefrom the word \u201caction\u201d and substituting therefor the word \u201cappeal.\u201d Defendants excepted and appealed. Their only assignment of error is directed to said judgment of Carr, J.\nR. L. Coburn for plaintiffs, appellees.\nPeel <& Peel for defendants, appellants."
  },
  "file_name": "0612-01",
  "first_page_order": 650,
  "last_page_order": 651
}