{
  "id": 8576987,
  "name": "JOSEPH STANLEY v. PRYDE W. BASINGER & COMPANY, INC., and PRYDE W. BASINGER",
  "name_abbreviation": "Stanley v. Pryde W. Basinger & Co.",
  "decision_date": "1965-11-24",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "718",
  "last_page": "719",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "265 N.C. 718"
    }
  ],
  "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": [
    {
      "cite": "200 S.E. 910",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "912"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "215 N.C. 61",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8628004
      ],
      "pin_cites": [
        {
          "page": "64"
        }
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/215/0061-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 198,
    "char_count": 2439,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.569,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.20673599117168606
    },
    "sha256": "89d31f428d8bab98251c1a43b592e840c92e5eb8305e6a7c84ad64a8deadb608",
    "simhash": "1:9cf0a084b330b47b",
    "word_count": 410
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:31:16.118019+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "JOSEPH STANLEY v. PRYDE W. BASINGER & COMPANY, INC., and PRYDE W. BASINGER."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PeR Cueiam.\nHad plaintiff failed to appear when this case was called for trial pursuant to the calendar, or had plaintiff refused to go to trial after being ordered to proceed, the court below, either under G.S. 1-222(4), or in its inherent power, \u201ccould have dismissed the cause \u2018as of nonsuit\u2019 after plaintiff had been called and failed to prosecute\u201d his suit. Sykes v. Blakey, 215 N.C. 61, 64, 200 S.E. 910, 912. Plaintiff here, however, was present and ready for trial when his case was called. Under these circumstances, the judge was without authority to dismiss the action.\nReversed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PeR Cueiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Archibald C. Bufty for plaintiff appellant.",
      "Grier, Parker, Poe & Thompson by Gaston H. Gage for defendant appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "JOSEPH STANLEY v. PRYDE W. BASINGER & COMPANY, INC., and PRYDE W. BASINGER.\n(Filed 24 November, 1965.)\nTrial \u00a7 4\u2014\nWhen plaintiff's counsel appears and announces his readiness to proceed to trial when the cause is called on a \u201cclean-up\u201d calendar, the court has no authority to dismiss the action on the ground of laches for failure to prosecute the action.\nAppeal by plaintiff from Gwyn, J., March 1965 Session of RowaN.\nBy this action, instituted on June 2, 1960, plaintiff seeks to recover damages for defendants\u2019 alleged conversion of an automobile.\nThe case was tried at the May 1961 Term, and the jury answered the issues in favor of plaintiff. By an order entered May 18, 1961, the presiding judge set aside the verdict as being against the greater weight of the evidence. Thereafter neither plaintiff nor defendants moved to calendar the case for trial; it lay perdu. At the March 1965 Session, this case, along with a number of others, was placed upon a \u201cclean-up calendar.\u201d After receiving a copy of this calendar, defendants\u2019 counsel wrote a letter on March 8, 1965 to the presiding judge, Honorable Allen H. Gwyn, requesting \u201cthat this matter be dismissed upon the call of the clean-up calendar.\u201d When the case was called, as calendared, at 9:30 a.m. on March 18, 1965, plaintiff and his counsel were present in court and announced their readiness for trial. Neither defendants nor their counsel were in court. In response to Judge Gwyn\u2019s inquiry as to why the case had not been retried, counsel for plaintiff replied that \u201cthere was not much involved and nobody pushed it.\u201d His Honor then nonsuited the cause for that plaintiff had been \u201cguilty of laches for failure to prosecute.\u201d From this judgment plaintiff appeals.\nArchibald C. Bufty for plaintiff appellant.\nGrier, Parker, Poe & Thompson by Gaston H. Gage for defendant appellees."
  },
  "file_name": "0718-01",
  "first_page_order": 758,
  "last_page_order": 759
}