{
  "id": 8622357,
  "name": "JOHN RICHARD SOLOKY v. MARY HOYLE COOKE and C. T. COOKE",
  "name_abbreviation": "Soloky v. Cooke",
  "decision_date": "1960-09-21",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "62",
  "last_page": "62",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "253 N.C. 62"
    }
  ],
  "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": 112,
    "char_count": 1297,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.631,
    "sha256": "660fb37e7852231653445f5f1ffc145adbad19d5ee727cd6ee9b302c6ca08cf6",
    "simhash": "1:bab6c1011e6823e8",
    "word_count": 208
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:02:38.064481+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "JOHN RICHARD SOLOKY v. MARY HOYLE COOKE and C. T. COOKE."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam:\nUpon careful consideration of the evidence shown in the record of case on appeal taken in the light most favorable to plaintiff, it appears sufficient to support the verdict of the jury, and the verdict is adequate to support the judgment.\nThe record indicates that the trial was conducted in accordance with law, and error for which the verdict and judgment should be disturbed is not made to appear. Hence in the judgment from which appeal is taken there is \u25a0\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam:"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Mayo & Mayo, Wilkinson & Ward for plaintiff, appellee.",
      "Norman & Rodman for defendants, appellants."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "JOHN RICHARD SOLOKY v. MARY HOYLE COOKE and C. T. COOKE.\n(Filed 21 September, 1960.)\nAppeal by defendants-from Morris, J., at. April Term, 1960, of WASHINGTON. -\nCivil action to recover property damage resulting from actionable negligence -of defendants in a collision between automobile of plaintiff and truck of defendants. The case was submitted to the jury and the jury found for its verdict that plaintiff\u2019s automobile was damaged by the negligence of the defendants as alleged in the complaint; that plaintiff did not by his own negligence contribute to his injury and damage; and that plaintiff is entitled to recover of defendants $2,295.00.\nDefendants appeal therefrom to Supreme Court, and assign error.\nMayo & Mayo, Wilkinson & Ward for plaintiff, appellee.\nNorman & Rodman for defendants, appellants."
  },
  "file_name": "0062-01",
  "first_page_order": 102,
  "last_page_order": 102
}