{
  "id": 8680949,
  "name": "KENNETH McCASKILL vs. ARCHIBALD McBRYDE AND ATLAS JONES",
  "name_abbreviation": "McCaskill v. McBryde",
  "decision_date": "1841-12",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "52",
  "last_page": "53",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "nominative",
      "cite": "2 Ired. Eq. 52"
    },
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "37 N.C. 52"
    }
  ],
  "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": "1 Dev. & Bat. Eq. 408",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Dev. & Bat. Eq.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 224,
    "char_count": 3303,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.534,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.0052889892850951e-07,
      "percentile": 0.5404979209212584
    },
    "sha256": "13d578a759b46efc39229606830c4b21a6d9a79de3b0f1838979fe1839d8331b",
    "simhash": "1:abe95dea6a3b026b",
    "word_count": 588
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:50:27.933727+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "KENNETH McCASKILL vs. ARCHIBALD McBRYDE AND ATLAS JONES."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Gaston, J.\nThis bill was filed by the plaintiff, who had formerly resided in this State, and afterwards removed to Scotland, against McBryde and Jones to have an account of the agency of William Martin, deceased, their testator, who upon the plaintiff\u2019s removal had been constituted a general pttorney lor the collection of his debts and transaction of his business in this State, and also an account of their own gency as the plaintiff\u2019s attorneys in fact since the death the testator. Jones, not residing within the State, was not served with a subpoena, but was made a party defendant by publication, and the bill as to him has been taken pro con-fesso. McBryde answered the bill, and the cause is now-brought on to be heard. It is not questioned but that sufficient matter is stated in the bill to render this a fit case for an account. McBryde\u2019s answer contains no matter to bar an account, and Jones does not resist it. The account, therefore, must be taken as prayed.\nIn the course of the proceedings below, an order was entered, declared to be <! without prejudice,\u201d for the taking of an account against Jones only. Such an account has been taken and several exceptions made thereunto on the part of Jones. It is prayed on the part of the plaintiff to hear the cause against this defendant upon these exceptions. The order, under which this account was taken, is contrary to the course of the Court, and not regarded as an adjudication of the Court, but is viewed as a mere consent rule of the parties for speeding the cause, if it may be thus speeded without doing injustice. See MeLin v McNamara, 1 Dev. & Bat. Eq. 408. In this case, we are satisfied that justice cannot be done, except by taking the accounts in the regular way according to the course of the Court, so that all the parties may be actors therein and it rqay be conclusively ascertain \u2022 ed what is the tru,estate of the accounts between the parties respectively.\nThe Court, therefore, sets aside in toto the account reported, and directs a reference for taking all the matters of account prayed for in the bill,\nPer Curiam, Ordered accodingly.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Gaston, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Badger for the plaintiff.",
      "Winston and Mendenhall for the defendants."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "KENNETH McCASKILL vs. ARCHIBALD McBRYDE AND ATLAS JONES.\nWhere there was abill for an account against two, and a judgment pro con-fesso as to one, and in the course of the proceedings an order was entered that an a.ccount should be taken as to the latter \u201cwithout prejudice,\u201d and an account was accordingly taken, and exceptions filed thereto, Held that this order was contrary to the course of the Court, and not an adjudication of the Court, but entered by consent of the parties to speed the cause without doing injustice; and where it seemed that justice could not be done, unless the account was taken as to all the parties, the account taken under this order was set aside in tolo and a new reference made as to all the matters of account prayed for in the bill.\n\u25a0The case of MeLin v McHamqra, 1 Dev. & Bat. Ecp 408, cited and approved.\nThis was a case removed to the Supreme Court, from the Court of Equity of Mqore Coqnty, at Fall Term, 1841, on affidavit of one of the parties. The proceedings and 'facts, upon which the opinion of the Supreme Coqrt is founded, are set forth in the opinion of the Court.\nBadger for the plaintiff.\nWinston and Mendenhall for the defendants."
  },
  "file_name": "0052-01",
  "first_page_order": 52,
  "last_page_order": 53
}