{
  "id": 2986257,
  "name": "THOMAS C. ODDO v. JEFFREY L. PRESSER",
  "name_abbreviation": "Oddo v. Presser",
  "decision_date": "2004-02-06",
  "docket_number": "No. 368A03",
  "first_page": "128",
  "last_page": "128",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "358 N.C. 128"
    }
  ],
  "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": "581 S.E.2d 123",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 2003,
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "158 N.C. App. 360",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        9187642
      ],
      "year": 2003,
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/158/0360-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 139,
    "char_count": 1601,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.731,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.46765605076141e-08,
      "percentile": 0.2799410313110919
    },
    "sha256": "240c798bd90eb112b9487517407de3bcf7e23839580f2c1172470c28241b5661",
    "simhash": "1:7ac864be62a584fd",
    "word_count": 258
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:12:52.416221+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "THOMAS C. ODDO v. JEFFREY L. PRESSER"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PER CURIAM.\nAs to the issue of compensatory damages, we reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion. We affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals as to all remaining issues.\nREVERSED IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PER CURIAM."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Michelle D. Reingold for plaintiff-appellant and-appellee.",
      "Maxwell, Freeman & Bowman, RA., by James B. Maxwell, for defendant-appellant and-appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "THOMAS C. ODDO v. JEFFREY L. PRESSER\nNo. 368A03\n(Filed 6 February 2004)\nDamages and Remedies\u2014 alienation of affections and criminal conversation \u2014 loss of tuition benefits for children\nThe decision of the Court of Appeals remanding this alienation of affections and criminal conversation case for a new trial on the issue of compensatory damages is reversed for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals that evidence of plaintiffs lost tuition benefits for his children when plaintiffs employment as a Davidson College wrestling coach was terminated, allegedly because he was unable to function in the workplace due to mental anguish caused by defendant\u2019s actions, was not overly speculative and was properly admitted by the trial court.\nAppeal by plaintiff and defendant pursuant to N.C.G.S. \u00a7 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 158 N.C. App. 360, 581 S.E.2d 123 (2003), reversing in part, finding no error in part, and remanding for a new trial on the issue of compensatory damages a judgment entered 4 May 2001 by Judge Robert R Johnston in Superior Court, Mecklenburg County. Heard in the Supreme Court 17 November 2003.\nMichelle D. Reingold for plaintiff-appellant and-appellee.\nMaxwell, Freeman & Bowman, RA., by James B. Maxwell, for defendant-appellant and-appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0128-01",
  "first_page_order": 160,
  "last_page_order": 160
}