{
  "id": 8681818,
  "name": "P. J. WRAY v. JAMES H. HARRIS",
  "name_abbreviation": "Wray v. Harris",
  "decision_date": "1877-06",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "77",
  "last_page": "79",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "77 N.C. 77"
    }
  ],
  "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": 193,
    "char_count": 2496,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.428,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.807795107080638e-07,
      "percentile": 0.9314801750990116
    },
    "sha256": "0650f86e0705a2e43ff639518887ff2ef34034499c17124d912f639282508c36",
    "simhash": "1:f369ed34f9f2f7e0",
    "word_count": 439
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:46:21.915598+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "P. J. WRAY v. JAMES H. HARRIS."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "RodmaN, J.\nIt is very clear that the claim'of lien filed im the office of the Clerk of the Superior Court does not come> up to the requirements of the Act. Bat. Rev. ch. 65, \u00a7 4.. \u25a0It does not specify in detail the materials furnished or la-\u2022 bor performed, or give the dates at which the materials were; furnished or the labor was performed. The date given in.' the claim was evidently intended only as the date when it; was put in writing for the purpose of being filed. Such, liens are tbe creatures of the statute and its requirements-must be substantially observed.\nPer Curiam. Judgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "RodmaN, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Messrs. Merrimon, Fuller fr Ashe, for plaintiff.",
      "Messrs. Busbee Busbee, for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "P. J. WRAY v. JAMES H. HARRIS.\nPractice \u2014 Mechanics\u2019 Lien \u2014 Sufficiency of Claim.\nA claim of lien, filed under the provisions of Bat. Rev. ch. 65, \u00a7 4, must comply with the requirements of the statute; Therefore, when the plaintiff\u2019s claim failed to specify in detail the material furnished and labor performed, or the time when the material was furnished and the \u25a0labor performed; Held, to be irregular and void. \u25a0\nCivil Action tried at January Special Term, 1877, of Wake Superior Court, before Schenck, J.\nThe plaintiff instituted this action to recover a balance due from the defendant on a contract for building a cotton gin, &c., and claimed a lien upon the same and the land \u2022whereon it was situated by virtue of the following notice of lien:\n\u201cP. J. WRAY, YS. James H. Harms. i Mechanics lien.\nThe above named P. J. Wray files his notice and claim of lien in the office of the Superior Court Clerk for Wake County. Said claim is for work and labor done and materials furnished for the said J. H Harris upon the plantation! of said Harris in Cary Township in said County, to the amount of $508 upon which amount there is a balance now unpaid of $255. Said work and labor and materials were-performed and furnished in the construction of a cotton gin upon said plantation, and upon the said cotton gin and land upon which the same is situated, the said Wray claims his-lien. This 17th day of December, 187-5.\nP. J.'Wray.\nSworn and subscribed befoi\u2019e me this 17th day of December, 1875. J. N. BuNTiNG, C. S. C.\u201d\nThe defendant answered, admitting the debt, but denying: that the above notice created any lien on his property as-claimed by the plaintiff, by reason of its failure to comply with the requirements of the statute.\nHis Honor held that the notice was insufficient and the; plaintiff appealed.\nMessrs. Merrimon, Fuller fr Ashe, for plaintiff.\nMessrs. Busbee Busbee, for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0077-01",
  "first_page_order": 91,
  "last_page_order": 93
}