{
  "id": 8615581,
  "name": "THELMA PARKER v. E. S. YOUNCE and HAROLD GARDNER",
  "name_abbreviation": "Parker v. Younce",
  "decision_date": "1957-02-27",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "590",
  "last_page": "591",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "245 N.C. 590"
    }
  ],
  "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": 143,
    "char_count": 1552,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.594,
    "sha256": "3185750c031c41c027f15c9a1653ff899e10c0946b0110b366cd3885b58f9693",
    "simhash": "1:9cb87f1ac18bdd6d",
    "word_count": 242
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T14:55:29.608424+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "THELMA PARKER v. E. S. YOUNCE and HAROLD GARDNER."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PER Cueiam.\nThe conclusion reached is that the evidence, when considered in the light most favorable to plaintiff, presented a case for jury determination on the issues submitted. Moreover, consideration of appellant\u2019s assignments of error relating to rulings on evidence and to the charge fails to disclose any error of law deemed of sufficient prejudicial effect to warrant a new trial. Hence, the verdict and judgment will not be disturbed.\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PER Cueiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "S. M. Blount for plaintiff, appellee.",
      "LeRoy Scott for defendant, appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "THELMA PARKER v. E. S. YOUNCE and HAROLD GARDNER.\n(Filed 27 February, 1957.)\nAppeal by defendant Gardner from Frizzelle, J., October Term, 1956, of Beaufort.\nCivil action growing out of a collision that occurred 6 March, 1954, at night, on a paved highway known as Whichard\u2019s Beach Road, between a Plymouth car, owned and operated by plaintiff, and a pickup truck operated by defendant Gardner, resulting in damage to plaintiff\u2019s car.\nDefendant Younce is not a party to this appeal. At the close of plaintiff\u2019s evidence, judgment of nonsuit was entered as to him. Thereupon, he abandoned his alleged counterclaim.\nMotions for judgment of nonsuit made by defendant Gardner were overruled; and, as between plaintiff and defendant Gardner, three issues were submitted to the jury. The jury answered the negligence issue, \u201cYes,\u201d the contributory negligence issue, \u201cNo,\u201d and awarded damages in the amount of $382.45.\nFrom judgment in plaintiff\u2019s favor, in accordance with verdict, defendant Gardner appealed, assigning errors.\nS. M. Blount for plaintiff, appellee.\nLeRoy Scott for defendant, appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0590-01",
  "first_page_order": 628,
  "last_page_order": 629
}