{
  "id": 8625998,
  "name": "HOWARD BOWEN v. HARRY CALVIN AYERS",
  "name_abbreviation": "Bowen v. Ayers",
  "decision_date": "1958-09-17",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "721",
  "last_page": "722",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "248 N.C. 721"
    }
  ],
  "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": 127,
    "char_count": 1311,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.552,
    "sha256": "a8d097e84648aa519b33f9183880c16e083ad94f4dded53f8a15f1e220730ecf",
    "simhash": "1:329e11ac023ba78b",
    "word_count": 200
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:38:24.992419+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "HOWARD BOWEN v. HARRY CALVIN AYERS."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nThe defendant\u2019s assignments of error have been examined with care. They involve only the application of established principles of law which need no further elaboration or discussion. Neither reversible nor prejudicial error has been made to appear. The trial and judgment will be upheld.\nNo Error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Pritchett & Cooke and Critcher & Gurganus for defendant, appellant.",
      "Griffin \u25a0& Martin and Peel & Peel for plaintiff, appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "HOWARD BOWEN v. HARRY CALVIN AYERS.\n(Filed 17 September, 1958.)\nAppeal by defendant from Moore, J., and a jury, at January Term, 1958, of Martin.\nCivil action by plaintiff for alleged alienation of his wife\u2019s affections, tried upon the following issues, answered as indicated:\n\u201c1. Did the defendant, Harry Calvin Ayers, maliciously alienate the affections of the plaintiff\u2019s wife, as alleged in the complaint? Answer: YES.\n\u201c2. If so, was the wrongful act or acts of the defendant accompanied by fraud, actual malice, recklessness, oppression, or other wilful and wanton aggravation? Answer: YES.\n\u201c3. What actual damages, if any, is the plaintiff entitled to recover of the defendant? Answer: $1,000.00.\n\u201c4. What punitive damages, if any, is the plaintiff entitled to recover of the defendant? Answer: $500.00.\u201d\nFrom judgment entered upon the verdict, the defendant appeals.\nPritchett & Cooke and Critcher & Gurganus for defendant, appellant.\nGriffin \u25a0& Martin and Peel & Peel for plaintiff, appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0721-01",
  "first_page_order": 763,
  "last_page_order": 764
}