{
  "id": 4664082,
  "name": "J. E. SAINT, Receiver, Plaintiff in Error, v. S. M. FOLSOM, Defendant in Error",
  "name_abbreviation": "Saint v. Folsom",
  "decision_date": "1896-09-01",
  "docket_number": "No. 609",
  "first_page": "650",
  "last_page": "651",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "8 N.M. 650"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.M.",
    "id": 8835,
    "name": "Supreme Court of New Mexico"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 52,
    "name_long": "New Mexico",
    "name": "N.M."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "7 N. M. 601",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.M.",
      "case_ids": [
        4657898
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nm/7/0601-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "7 N. M. 601",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.M.",
      "case_ids": [
        4657898
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nm/7/0601-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 79,
    "char_count": 791,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.486,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.15259248705233394
    },
    "sha256": "43414aae76b2adc4073dfe4f1c6a02b31c94809ab51d543d7c5373b6e2f70d94",
    "simhash": "1:2b60d821ebf9721d",
    "word_count": 141
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:56:15.654849+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Smith, C. J.,Laughlin, J., Hamilton and Bantz, JJ., concur."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "J. E. SAINT, Receiver, Plaintiff in Error, v. S. M. FOLSOM, Defendant in Error."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "The facts in this case and the questions of law arising thereon are essentially the same as in the case of J. W. Schofield, receiver, v. S. M. Folsom, reported in 7 N. M. 601, and is controlled by it.\nWe being satisfied with the conclusion arrived at in that case, affirm this.\nThere being no error this case is affirmed, and it will accordingly be so ordered.\nSmith, C. J.,Laughlin, J., Hamilton and Bantz, JJ., concur.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": null
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "W. S. Childers for plaintiff in error.",
      "F. W. Clanoy for defendant in error."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "[No. 609.\nSeptember 1, 1896.]\nJ. E. SAINT, Receiver, Plaintiff in Error, v. S. M. FOLSOM, Defendant in Error.\nAffirmed on essentially same state of facts and for same reasons stated in Schofield v. Folsom, 7 N. M. 601.\nError, to the Second Judicial District Court, Bernalillo County.\nAffirmed.\nW. S. Childers for plaintiff in error.\nF. W. Clanoy for defendant in error."
  },
  "file_name": "0650-01",
  "first_page_order": 674,
  "last_page_order": 675
}