Lowenstein v. Finney
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Pulaski Circuit Court. Joseph W. Martin, Judge. 1. To allow the re-examination of a witness after the evidence is closed and argument begun was( unfair and an abuse of discretion by the court. 2. Where an assignor purports to convey all his assets and reserves a material part, the assignment is void, whether done intentionally or not. Wait, Fr.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Pulaski Circuit Court. Joseph W. Martin, Judge. 1. To allow the re-examination of a witness after the evidence is closed and argument begun was( unfair and an abuse of discretion by the court. 2. Where an assignor purports to convey all his assets and reserves a material part, the assignment is void, whether done intentionally or not. Wait, Fr. Conv., secs. 8, 19, 197, 322-3-4; ib., sec. 9; 22 Wall., 513:6 id., 78-9; 31 Ark., 666-9; ^ N. H., 288; Burrill on Ass., secs. 108-9. 3. The preference of Ratcliffe & Fletcher for services to be rendered in the future avoided the…
1Opinion of the CourtHughes, J.
Appellants sued out an attachment, and had it levied upon a stock of goods and other property of the appellee, which appellee had before then conveyed, by deed of assignment for the benefit of his creditors, to R. A. Little as assignee. Before the assignee had given bond or taken possession of the property conveyed by the assignment, and upon the day of its execution, upon the petition of the German National Bank, the largest preferred creditor of the appellee, the chancery court of Pulaski county appointed R. A. Little, the assignee, receiver, upon the representation in the petition, that…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Brennan v. . WillsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
- First National Bank of Dubuque v. BakerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1887
3Cited by10 opinions
- Bank of Little Rock v. FrankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1896
- Harold J. Abrams v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1960
- Parker v. NixonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1932
- Baker v. BaerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1894
- Hickingbotham v. Industrial Finance Corp.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1936
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.