{
  "id": 11278858,
  "name": "R. F. SIMONTON, Cashier, v. L. G. GAITHER and others",
  "name_abbreviation": "Simonton v. Gaither",
  "decision_date": "1874-06",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "506",
  "last_page": "507",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "71 N.C. 506"
    }
  ],
  "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": 89,
    "char_count": 939,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.454,
    "sha256": "437f9dd3a4a94786e18795c31de02ad08bceb71432a9eaa09871057439d7b4ae",
    "simhash": "1:fe086335ba22af78",
    "word_count": 166
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:06:20.176490+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "R. F. SIMONTON, Cashier, v. L. G. GAITHER and others."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Byetom, J.\nThe sanie motions were made and overruled in this case, as in the ease of Simonton v. Lanier, decided at this term of the Court. The facts in the two cases, are almost identical, and therefore for the reasons given in the ease of Simonton v. Lanier, we hold the ruling of his Honor below, on the motion to arrest the judgment, erroneous.\nThe case is remanded to the end that the proper correction be made, and that upon the payment of the judgment and legal interest, satisfaction be entered of record.\nPee Cueiam. Judgment reversed and case remanded.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Byetom, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "McOorMe <& Bailey, for appellants.",
      "Bolle & Armfield and Fwrches, contra."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "R. F. SIMONTON, Cashier, v. L. G. GAITHER and others.\n(The Syllabus in this is the same as it is in the preceding case of 8wnon-ton v, Lamierr and others \u2014 page 498.)\nIn this case, the defendants appealed upon the same grounds and for the same reasons as did the defendants in the preceding case, ante.\nMcOorMe <& Bailey, for appellants.\nBolle & Armfield and Fwrches, contra."
  },
  "file_name": "0506-01",
  "first_page_order": 514,
  "last_page_order": 515
}