{
  "id": 8621864,
  "name": "OTTWAY BURTON v. DANIEL LEWIS MATTHEWS, and wife ETTA MATTHEWS, and LEE BROWN",
  "name_abbreviation": "Burton v. Matthews",
  "decision_date": "1959-04-29",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "236",
  "last_page": "237",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "250 N.C. 236"
    }
  ],
  "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": 99,
    "char_count": 940,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.446,
    "sha256": "ad8284811110d09c915d325e4a9a119e35e39e32f76f60c40b257384d97463bd",
    "simhash": "1:8ebb93eba22bbdd4",
    "word_count": 142
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:44:40.326881+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "OTTWAY BURTON v. DANIEL LEWIS MATTHEWS, and wife ETTA MATTHEWS, and LEE BROWN."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PER Curiam.\nWhile each of plaintiff\u2019s assignments has been carefully considered, none discloses prejudicial error or merits particular discussion. Hence, the verdict and judgment will not be disturbed.\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PER Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Don Davis for plaintiff, appellant.",
      "No counsel contra."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "OTTWAY BURTON v. DANIEL LEWIS MATTHEWS, and wife ETTA MATTHEWS, and LEE BROWN.\n(Filed 29 April, 1959.)\nAppeal by plaintiff from Johnston, J., November Term, 1958, of Randolph.\nCivil action to recover compensation for services.\nPrior to trial, demurrers by defendants Etta Matthews and Lee Brown were sustained; and, as to them, the action was dismissed. Plaintiff did not except to or appeal from those rulings.\nAt trial, the jury, -answering the one issue submitted, found that plaintiff was entitled to recover from defendant Daniel Lewis Matthews the sum of $100.00. Judgment, in accordance with verdict, was entered. Plaintiff excepted and appealed, assigning error\u2019s.\nDon Davis for plaintiff, appellant.\nNo counsel contra."
  },
  "file_name": "0236-01",
  "first_page_order": 276,
  "last_page_order": 277
}