{
  "id": 8650718,
  "name": "R. O. BURTON, Jr., Adm'r, v. E. P. GREEN et al.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Burton v. Green",
  "decision_date": "1886-02",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "215",
  "last_page": "217",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "94 N.C. 215"
    }
  ],
  "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": [
    {
      "cite": "82 N. C., 243",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8682739
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/82/0243-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "72 N. C., 119",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8687275
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/72/0119-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 212,
    "char_count": 3190,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.501,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.886578750737368e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7284071387945784
    },
    "sha256": "8ad79ff139f1dceedad4f7896eb4727225638fb1fed6cd62c3ff695f640917e1",
    "simhash": "1:be39b31472dec97b",
    "word_count": 596
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:44:11.219650+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "R. O. BURTON, Jr., Adm\u2019r, v. E. P. GREEN et al."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "MfRRIM\u00fcn, J.\nThe appellant\u2019s counsel duly stated the case upon appeal for this Court, the counsel of the appellees suggested amendments and objections thereto, the Judge who presided at the trial was notified of such disagreement, and requested to settle the case upon appeal according to law. He took the trial papers and his notes of the trial and the evidence, for that purpose. The papers and notes of the trial were afterwards lost. The case has not been settled, and the Judge now states, that, without them, he has not, and cannot obtain, such information as is necessary to enable him to settle the case. It is not suggested by the parties, or either of them, that the lost papers may yet be found.\nIt must be taken that the data, necessary to enable the Judge to settle the case upon appeal, cannot be supplied. He declares he cannot settle it for the lack of such information. The appellant has been reasonably diligent in his efforts to prosecute his appeal upon its merits, and is unable to do so by no fault of his own. He ought not, therefore, to suffer prejudice. In such a case the only remedy is to grant a new trial, and this will be done. Isler v. Haddock, 72 N. C., 119; Sanders v. Norris, 82 N. C., 243.\nThe counsel for the appellees suggested that the lost trial papers might be supplied, as allowed by the The Code \u00a7600, and the case might yet be settled, as the Judge who presided at the trial is yet in office, and indeed, he might do so, if he were now out of office. This might be so, but for the important fact, that the Judge declares that he cannot settle the case without his notes of the trial and the evidence. It does not appear that the parties can agree as to the facts and the grounds of exceptions taken in the course of the trial.\nTo the end that justice may.be fairly done, the appellant being in no default, a new trial must be granted. Let this opinion be certified to the Superior Court according to law.\nIt is so ordered. ' Venire de novo.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "MfRRIM\u00fcn, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Mr. T. N. Hill, for the plaintiff.",
      "Mr. W. H. Bay, for the defendants."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "R. O. BURTON, Jr., Adm\u2019r, v. E. P. GREEN et al.\nNew Trial.\nWhere it appears that the notes o\u00ed the trial have been lost, and the Judge certifies that he cannot make up the case on appeal without them, and the parties cannot agree on a statement of the case, and it further appears that the appellant is in no default in perfecting his appeal, a new trial will be granted.\n(Isler v. Haddock, 72 N. G., 119; Sanders v. Norris, S2 N. C., 243; cited and approved).\nCivil action, tried before Avery, Judge, at Spring Term, 1884, of the Superior Court of Halifax county.\nThere was a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff, and the defendants appealed.\nThere was no statement of the case on appeal accompanying the transcript of the record which was docketed in this Court, and in answer to a writ of certiorari directed to him, the trial Judge made return that the notes made on the trial of the case were lost, and that he had no recollection of the matters which took place on the trial, and could not settle the case on appeal, without the lost notes.\nUpon this return to the certiorari, the appellants moved in this Court for a new trial.\nMr. T. N. Hill, for the plaintiff.\nMr. W. H. Bay, for the defendants."
  },
  "file_name": "0215-01",
  "first_page_order": 255,
  "last_page_order": 257
}