{
  "id": 11963903,
  "name": "Burgwyn vs. -",
  "name_abbreviation": "Burgwyn",
  "decision_date": "1799-05",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "104",
  "last_page": "104",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "nominative",
      "cite": "2 Hayw. 104"
    },
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "3 N.C. 104"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C. Super. Ct.",
    "id": 22358,
    "name": "North Carolina Superior Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 120,
    "char_count": 958,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.355,
    "sha256": "caf0a7206fc2c0794eea01d83b4b13620ea3fbec8df7b1d999e97c4df3b07531",
    "simhash": "1:0f3ad8994a524253",
    "word_count": 179
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:25:52.833864+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Burgwyn vs. \u2014"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per curiam.\nThe objection may be now i\u00bbVsn, and it is fatal; Where there are two r,;\u201dtn'-'\"s and one only ;ued, he ,<(y :-iy,\u00a1 yo 1 :-.;ntracted also vra a\u2019v. her, vd-i\\ i-.y \u00ed!k \u00ab-ovo \u2019 \u25a0 . '-1'.:!. : vim me to con-vibu.e : ; of h \u2022. . 'U dies, and the whole deb. \u2022 irviv- : iV- '\u2022 . ,\u00ab excutors of the deceased ate not iiaide* al!, yon e; -\u00abnot make them so by suing them ; then shewing in evidence that there is a surviving partner, proves them not liable to the contract, and consequently not to a reeovery in the action.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Burgwyn vs. \u2014\n/\"^NE of several partners drew a bill of exbange, subscribed with the name of the company ; which bill came by endorsement to the plaintiff, and he sued the administrator of one of the partners, there being another partner still alive. It was ob* jected that he ought to have sued the survivor; to which it was answered, that should have been pleaded in abatement: and for this was cited Rice vs. Shate, S Burr. 26ii."
  },
  "file_name": "0104-01",
  "first_page_order": 108,
  "last_page_order": 108
}