{
  "id": 8624787,
  "name": "NORTH CAROLINA NATURAL GAS CORPORATION, Petitioner v. EDGAR V. EDENS, Respondent",
  "name_abbreviation": "North Carolina Natural Gas Corp. v. Edens",
  "decision_date": "1960-05-18",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "593",
  "last_page": "594",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "252 N.C. 593"
    }
  ],
  "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": 159,
    "char_count": 1778,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.569,
    "sha256": "023b0ef4df9670bd8f00a591d269235c9bde62cda8dd70e21fe8d3955c86a596",
    "simhash": "1:2870c71252813bb1",
    "word_count": 272
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:30:54.749131+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "NORTH CAROLINA NATURAL GAS CORPORATION, Petitioner v. EDGAR V. EDENS, Respondent."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nThe case on appeal contains all or a portion of the testimony of two witnesses, one (Mr. Rose) for the respondent and the other (Mr. McCormick) for the petitioner. Indeed, nothing appears to show that any witness testified to the reasonable market value of the land covered by the easement or to the reasonable market value of respondent\u2019s remaining land either before or after petitioner acquired such easement. Obviously, the bulk of the testimony offered at the trial does not appear in the record before us.\nPetitioner\u2019s three assignments of error relate to the overruling or sustaining of objections to certain questions asked Mr. Rose or Mr. McCormick. Particular discussion of these assignments is deemed unnecessary. Suffice to say, consideration thereof fails to disclose prejudicial error.\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Sanford, Phillips, McCoy & Weaver for petitioner, appellant.",
      "Clark, Braswell & Hill for respondent, appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "NORTH CAROLINA NATURAL GAS CORPORATION, Petitioner v. EDGAR V. EDENS, Respondent.\n(Filed 18 May, 1960.)\nAppeal by petitioner from McKinnon, J., October Term, 1959, of CUMBERLAND.\nProceeding in which respondent admitted petitioner\u2019s right to acquire by condemnation an easement across respondent\u2019s land for the construction of a pipeline for the transmission of gas. The only issue raised by the pleadings and submitted to the jury was: \u201cWhat sum, if any, is respondent entitled to recover of petitioner as just compensation for the appropriation of their (sic) land, over and above all special benefits, if any, accruing to said lands, by reason of the appropriation by petitioner of the easement described in the Petition?\u201d The jury answered, \u201c$9,000.00.\u201d\nJudgment, in accordance with the verdict, was entered. Petitioner excepted and appealed.\nSanford, Phillips, McCoy & Weaver for petitioner, appellant.\nClark, Braswell & Hill for respondent, appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0593-01",
  "first_page_order": 633,
  "last_page_order": 634
}