{
  "id": 8561246,
  "name": "MRS. MYRTLE PORTER, by and through her Next Friend, GRADY PORTER v. MARY WILLIAMS JARRELL",
  "name_abbreviation": "Porter ex rel. Porter v. Jarrell",
  "decision_date": "1963-05-22",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "505",
  "last_page": "506",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "259 N.C. 505"
    }
  ],
  "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": 155,
    "char_count": 1629,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.531,
    "sha256": "bb1720b80c73bd6d4c57bb08b1dbdbba8137e0d863da8d0a4742ebd741951c9e",
    "simhash": "1:02a66aff39808691",
    "word_count": 253
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:55:17.750134+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "MRS. MYRTLE PORTER, by and through her Next Friend, GRADY PORTER v. MARY WILLIAMS JARRELL."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nThe evidence, though conflicting in part, nevertheless was sufficient to go to the jury on the simple issues presented. The court sufficiently charged with respect to the rights and duties of the parties. The jury\u2019s resolution of the disputed facts is conclusive. The record discloses neither valid reason to send the case back, nor likli-hood that another hearing would produce a substantially different result.\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Gwyn \u2022<& Gwyn, by Allen H. Gwyn, Jr., for plaintiff appellee..",
      "Jordan, Wright, Henson A Nichols, Karl N. Hill, Jr., by Karl N. Hill, Jr., for defendant appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "MRS. MYRTLE PORTER, by and through her Next Friend, GRADY PORTER v. MARY WILLIAMS JARRELL.\n(Filed 22 May 1963.)\nAppeal by defendant from Copeland, S.J., October, 1962 Civil Term, RoCKingham Superior Court.\nCivil action to recover damages for personal injury plaintiff sustained as a result of being hit by the defendant\u2019s automobile at the intersection of east-west Highway No. 158 and north-south Highway No. 2351 in Rockingham County. The plaintiff, a pedestrian, with an armful of groceries, attempted to cross from the southwest to the northwest corner of the intersection. The evidence favorable to the plaintiff tended to show the defendant saw, or should have seen, the plaintiff, a partial cripple, in the act of crossing the intersection; nevertheless, negligently ran over her, proximately causing serious injury.\nIssues of negligence, contributory negligence, and damages were submitted to the jury. All were 'answered in favor of the plaintiff. From the judgment in accordance with the verdict, the defendant appealed.\nGwyn \u2022<& Gwyn, by Allen H. Gwyn, Jr., for plaintiff appellee..\nJordan, Wright, Henson A Nichols, Karl N. Hill, Jr., by Karl N. Hill, Jr., for defendant appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0505-01",
  "first_page_order": 549,
  "last_page_order": 550
}