{
  "id": 8623665,
  "name": "MRS. CALLIE C. YORK v. JOSEPH O. COLE and wife, SARAH FRANCIS COLE",
  "name_abbreviation": "York v. Cole",
  "decision_date": "1950-05-04",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "485",
  "last_page": "486",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "252 N.C. 485"
    }
  ],
  "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": 166,
    "char_count": 1996,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.564,
    "sha256": "701b3d1c70c61273c697cb866945441b9663e3be92a43fca0248a95f84f03a0f",
    "simhash": "1:2f3ed0d1a12718c6",
    "word_count": 332
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:30:54.749131+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "MRS. CALLIE C. YORK v. JOSEPH O. COLE and wife, SARAH FRANCIS COLE."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PeR Curiam.\nConsideration of the record on appeal reveals that the judgment from which, appeal is taken.is accordant with law. The recovery of the personal property in Wake County is but incidental to the main action. Hence the appeal is without merit, and patently is dilatory and frivolous. The judgment below is\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PeR Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "J. W. Hinsdale, Thomas Turner for plaintiff, appellee.",
      "Allen Langston for defendant appellants."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "MRS. CALLIE C. YORK v. JOSEPH O. COLE and wife, SARAH FRANCIS COLE.\n(Filed 4 May, 1950.)\nAppeal by defendants from Sharp, Special J., at January 11 Regular Civil Term, 1960, of GuilfoRd, High Point Division \u2014 heard upon motion of defendants for removal of the cause of action, as a matter of right, from Guilford County, North Carolina, to and for trial in Wake County, North Carolina, \u2014 possession of personal property being involved in the action.\nThe record shows that the cause came on for hearing before Sharp, S. J., assigned to hold the aforesaid Civil Term of the Superior Court, who, after reciting the procedural history of the action, finds \u201cthat on December 9, 1959, the defendants filed a motion in writing that the \u2018cause of action for the recovery of the automobile and all other personal property described in the complaint, except the property described in paragraph 32 of the plaintiff\u2019s amended complaint, be moved to Wake County for trial.\u2019 \u201d It is there, that is, in paragraph 32, described as certain specific household and kitchen furniture owned by plaintiff of the approximate value of five thousand dollars, and located in her three houses in High Point.\nAnd the record recites that after reading the pleadings and other papers filed in this case and hearing argument of counsel the court being of the opinion that the motion to remove as a matter of right should be denied, \u201cordered, adjudged and decreed that the motion to remove be and the same is hereby denied.\u201d\nDefendants except thereto and appeal therefrom to Supreme Court and assign error.\nJ. W. Hinsdale, Thomas Turner for plaintiff, appellee.\nAllen Langston for defendant appellants."
  },
  "file_name": "0485-01",
  "first_page_order": 525,
  "last_page_order": 526
}