{
  "id": 8573780,
  "name": "WAYLAND HENRY CAVINESS, Plaintiff v. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS, Defendant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Caviness v. Administrative Office of the Courts",
  "decision_date": "1982-10-05",
  "docket_number": "No. 254A82",
  "first_page": "738",
  "last_page": "738",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "306 N.C. 738"
    }
  ],
  "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": "289 S.E. 2d 853",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1982,
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "56 N.C. App. 542",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8522459
      ],
      "year": 1982,
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/56/0542-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 103,
    "char_count": 1077,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.784,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.20665085107278455
    },
    "sha256": "71b1a8f7cfa856594267c26f2b473caf155ee4762005c802765b3ef4aefb2783",
    "simhash": "1:29116a7c640744ae",
    "word_count": 179
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:30:26.892112+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "WAYLAND HENRY CAVINESS, Plaintiff v. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS, Defendant"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PER CURIAM.\nThe facts of this case are adequately stated in the majority opinion of the Court of Appeals. We conclude that the rationale in Judge Hedrick\u2019s dissenting opinion is an accurate statement of the law as it applies to this case. We adopt the dissenting opinion, and the opinion of the Court of Appeals is reversed and this case is remanded to the Court of Appeals with directions that it enter an order affirming the order of the Industrial Commission.\nReversed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PER CURIAM."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Rufus L. Edmisten, Attorney General, by Ralf F. Haskell and Elisha H. Bunting, Jr., Assistant Attorneys General, for appellant.",
      "Ottway Burton for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "WAYLAND HENRY CAVINESS, Plaintiff v. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS, Defendant\nNo. 254A82\n(Filed 5 October 1982)\nAppeal by defendant pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7A-30(2) from a decision of the Court of Appeals reversing an order of the Industrial Commission entered 19 January 1981. The opinion of the Court of Appeals by Judge Becton, with Judge Hill concurring and Judge Hedrick dissenting, is reported in 56 N.C. App. 542, 289 S.E. 2d 853 (1982).\nRufus L. Edmisten, Attorney General, by Ralf F. Haskell and Elisha H. Bunting, Jr., Assistant Attorneys General, for appellant.\nOttway Burton for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0738-01",
  "first_page_order": 766,
  "last_page_order": 766
}