{
  "id": 2102611,
  "name": "JONATHAN GUTHRIE vs. JOHN A. SORRELL'S HEIRS",
  "name_abbreviation": "Guthrie v. Sorrell's Heirs",
  "decision_date": "1849-06",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "13",
  "last_page": "14",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "nominative",
      "cite": "6 Ired. Eq. 13"
    },
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "41 N.C. 13"
    }
  ],
  "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": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 145,
    "char_count": 1574,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.493,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 8.138363859351185e-08,
      "percentile": 0.47326291996174297
    },
    "sha256": "3937f241973f99c63ac844683d1a7ae277814e8cd24a8aa090acaf8cf459f7d3",
    "simhash": "1:8c36a994579a85c4",
    "word_count": 282
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:16:52.195328+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "JONATHAN GUTHRIE vs. JOHN A. SORRELL\u2019S HEIRS."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Pearson, J.\nThis is a bill to redeem a tract of land, which is under mortgage. It was intended to present the very interesting question, whether one, who has taken a deed, absolute upon its face, but with the understanding that it is be a security for certain debts, to be liable to redemption, and who purchases the interest of the mortgagee at execution sale, at the instance of a creditor, not secured by the mortgage, takes an absolute estate, or merely acquires the right to add the amount of his bid to the debts secured by the mortgage l\nThis would have been a grave question, and one well worthy of consideration ; but we are not at liberty to entertain it, because the proper parties are not before us.\nIn a bill to redeem a mortgage, the personal representative of the mortgagee is a necessary party. He is the person entitled to receive the money, and must necessarily be a party in taking the account.\nThe bill must be dismissed for the want of a proper party, and, of course, without prejudice, but at the costs of the plaintiff. It has been pending six 3-ears, and it has been in this Court more than three years, awaiting the motion of the parlies.\nPer Curiam.\nBill dismissed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Pearson, J. Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Gui\u00f3n and Craig, for the plaintiff.",
      "J. II. Bryan and Ireclell, for the defendants,"
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "JONATHAN GUTHRIE vs. JOHN A. SORRELL\u2019S HEIRS.\nIn a bill to redeem a mortgage, the personal representative of the mortgagee is a necessary party.\nCause removed from the Court of Equity of Buncombe County, at the Fall Term 1845.\nThe case is sufficiently stated in the opinion delivered in this Court.\nGui\u00f3n and Craig, for the plaintiff.\nJ. II. Bryan and Ireclell, for the defendants,"
  },
  "file_name": "0013-01",
  "first_page_order": 19,
  "last_page_order": 20
}