{
  "id": 8693839,
  "name": "THE STATE TO THE USE OF JACOB MERRILL vs. JAMES R. McMINN & AL.",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Merrill v. McMinn",
  "decision_date": "1847-08",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "346",
  "last_page": "347",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "nominative",
      "cite": "7 Ired. 346"
    },
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "29 N.C. 346"
    }
  ],
  "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": "5 Ired. 105",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ired.",
      "case_ids": [
        11273943
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/27/0105-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "5 Ired. 105",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ired.",
      "case_ids": [
        11273943
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/27/0105-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 143,
    "char_count": 1846,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.468,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.3898517942824507e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6425150655501537
    },
    "sha256": "6e5c606b7ce28926c3da49445a4e71e43c3b948e057b0587bb81a9a9acf106b7",
    "simhash": "1:7f3f9593641c4bb8",
    "word_count": 322
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:47:24.590377+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "THE STATE TO THE USE OF JACOB MERRILL vs. JAMES R. McMINN & AL."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Daniel, J.\nIt is very certain that the objection would have been held good, had it not been for. the Act of the General Assembly, at its session of 1844-5, curing defects in the official bonds of certain officers therein named. The circumstance, that the constable\u2019s bond was taken by a Court, composed of only three magistrates, makes no difference since the passage of the aforesaid Act of Assembly. State v. Pool, 5 Ired. 105.\nPer Curiam-. Judgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Daniel, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "N. W. Woodfin, for the plaintiff.",
      "J. W. Woodfin and Francis, for the defendants."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "THE STATE TO THE USE OF JACOB MERRILL vs. JAMES R. McMINN & AL.\nWhere the' only record of the appointment and qualification of a constable Was in the' following words, to-wit: \u201cJames R. McMinn appeared in Court and filed his bond as constable for the County of Henderson for one year and was duly sworn.\u201d Held, that, under the Act of 1844, curing defects in the official bonds of certain officers therein named, this was sufficient evidence of the appointment of the constable, and of his having qualified and given bond.\nThe case of The State v. Pool, 5 Ired. 105, cited and approved.\nAppeal from the Superior Court of Law of Henderson County, at the Spring Term, 1845, his Honor Judge Manly presiding.\nThis was an action of debt on the bond of MeMinn, one of the defendants, as a constable in the County of Henderson. Plea, non est factum. The relator on the trial produced the entry of record made in the County Court, which entry is in the following words, to-wit: \u201c James R. MeMinn appeared in Court, and filed his bond as constable for the County of Henderson for one year and was duly sworn.\u201d The defendant objected that this entry did not establish his legal appointment as constable. The Court thought otherwise, and a verdict was rendered for the plaintiff, from which the defendant appealed.\nN. W. Woodfin, for the plaintiff.\nJ. W. Woodfin and Francis, for the defendants."
  },
  "file_name": "0346-01",
  "first_page_order": 354,
  "last_page_order": 355
}