{
  "id": 2092676,
  "name": "EMORY H. MERRIMON, to the use of SARAH PAXTON vs. WM. NORTON, Adm'r. of W. C. KILGORE, W. P. POORE and B. C. LANKFORD",
  "name_abbreviation": "Merrimon ex rel. Paxton v. Norton",
  "decision_date": "1872-06",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "115",
  "last_page": "116",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "67 N.C. 115"
    }
  ],
  "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": 196,
    "char_count": 2887,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.445,
    "sha256": "a24d401bb587ef67e4de0e09231572d25a4c1608bc90c8f41bbbc7c49f830853",
    "simhash": "1:b06f1c15e89961c4",
    "word_count": 523
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:32:25.131400+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "EMORY H. MERRIMON, to the use of SARAH PAXTON vs. WM. NORTON, Adm\u2019r. of W. C. KILGORE, W. P. POORE and B. C. LANKFORD."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Boyden,'J.\nThis was a civil action, brought upon a-note for two thousand dollars, dated the 10th of May, 1864, and this note had been'properly assigned to the plaintiff.\nThe execution of the note was admitted by the defendants Poore and Lanford, but denied on-the part of Norton for his intestate, Kilgore.\nThe following issues are submitted to the jury: 1st. \u00abDid W. C. Kilgore execute the note sued on, as alleged in the complaint?\u201d 2nd. \u201cWas the note sued on to he paid in good money or par money?\u201d\nHis Honor states that the whole contest in the evidence, was as to how the note was to be payable \u2014 whether in Confederate money, or money of the value of legal currency. None of the evidence given on the trial is stated. The Court charged the j ury that, if they found that the agreement was to pay in good money, they should find a verdict for the whole amount of the note, and interest, in present currency.\nThe jury returned the following verdict: \u201cWe find all the issues in favor o\u00ed the plaintiff for the v^lue of Confederate money.\u201d\nThe plaintiff moved lor a new trial, for what reason does not appear. The plaintiff then moved for judgment for the amount of the note, with interest from its date, in the present currency.\nThis motion was refused, and judgment was rendered for ---dollars, the amount due according to the scale, at the date of the note. It is true the verdict of the jury is somewhat irregular, but it does not appear that there was any motion made to correct the verdict.\nIt does appear, that hotli parties offered evidence before the jury as to funds in which the payment was to be made. There was no objection to the evidence offered, and the question seems to have been fairly submitted to the jury, as to what funds the note was to be paid in ; and although the jury say \u201c they find the issues in favor of the plaintiff,\u201d they further say for the value of Confederate money, and the Court rendered judgment for the value of the note in Confederate money, according to the scale as of the date of the note.\nThere is no error. Judgment affirmed. This will be certified.\nPee Cueiam. Judgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Boyden,'J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Phillips c& Merrimon, for the plaintiff.",
      "No counsel for the defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "EMORY H. MERRIMON, to the use of SARAH PAXTON vs. WM. NORTON, Adm\u2019r. of W. C. KILGORE, W. P. POORE and B. C. LANKFORD.\nThe issues submitted to a jury in an action upon a note given in May, 1864, being as to the execution of the note and the currency in which it was solvable; Held, that a verdict, finding \u201call issues in favor of the plaintiff for the value of Confederate money,\u201d is sufficient to support'a judgment for the amount due according to the legislative scale.\nCivil action, commenced in Buncombe Superior Court, after-wards removed to Henderson and tried at Spring Term, 1872, of the Superior Court, before Ilenry, J.\nThe opinion contains a sufficient statement of the case.\nPhillips c& Merrimon, for the plaintiff.\nNo counsel for the defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0115-01",
  "first_page_order": 125,
  "last_page_order": 126
}