{
  "id": 11277453,
  "name": "LUKE MASON v. JAMES OSGOOD",
  "name_abbreviation": "Mason v. Osgood",
  "decision_date": "1874-06",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "212",
  "last_page": "213",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "71 N.C. 212"
    }
  ],
  "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": 176,
    "char_count": 2300,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.415,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.676830387708631e-08,
      "percentile": 0.35675188012891873
    },
    "sha256": "56bdd8aedf56c86f4284bb6cc31f9eb6465b3154a149bdf2f44cff8ccefa1347",
    "simhash": "1:dff3e9d59bbe4c22",
    "word_count": 398
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:06:20.176490+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "LUKE MASON v. JAMES OSGOOD."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Bv.Num, J.\nThis is an application for a certiorari upon the ground that his Honor refused to allow the defendant to appeal from his judgment to the -Supreme \u00abCourt without giving an appeal bond and security, he having filed the certificate and affidavit required by law. The motion is founded upon chap. <@0, see. 1, Acts of 1873-\u20194, the material fact of which is as follows: \u201c That when any party to a civil action tried and\n\u00abdetermined in the Superior Court shall at the time of trial desire an appeal from the judgment rendered in said action to the Supreme Court, and shall be unable, by reason of his poverty, to give the security required by law for said appeal, it shall be the .duty of the Judge of said Superior Court, to make an order allowing the party to .appeal from said judgment to the Supreme Court, as in other eases of appeal now allowed by law .without giving security therefor.\u201d\nThe language of the statute, -\u201cwhen -awy party to a ei vil action,\u201d <&c., is so comprehensive that we must suppose it was not called to the attention of his Honor, else he would have held, as we now decide, that administrators and all other parties to the record, prosecuting or defending, are embraced by its terms and its spirit also. It was, therefore, error to refuse to allow the appeal.\nThe Clerk of this Court will issue the process as prayed for..\nJPee Cubiam. \u25a0 Judgment, certiorari granted.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Bv.Num, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Hubbard and Lehman, for petitioner.",
      "Smith Strong and Haughtor/i, - contra."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "LUKE MASON v. JAMES OSGOOD.\nAdministrators and all other parties to the record, prosecuting.,-or defending, are permitted under the act of 1873-N4, chap. 60, sec. .1, ti> appeal to the Supreme Court, without giving security therefor.\nPeti\u00edioN for a eertiorari to be directed . to \u25a0 the Judge and Clerk of the Superior Court of CeaveN county, to remove a judgment anokeertain,proceedings in the case to this Court-\nIt is stated in the petition that the plaintiff obtained a judgment against the petitioner, the defendant, as administrator, from which he desired to appeal, but was unable to give security, and for that reason h'is Honor refused to grant it.\nHis Honor, Judge Clabee, in certifying the proceedings, states as his reason therefor that the Court had decided that an administrator cannot appeal in forma pauperis.\nHubbard and Lehman, for petitioner.\nSmith Strong and Haughtor/i, - contra."
  },
  "file_name": "0212-01",
  "first_page_order": 220,
  "last_page_order": 221
}