Sweet v. Desha Lumber Co.
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Desha Circuit Court. Sweet & Trippe brought suit against the Desha Dumber and Planing Company. A demurrer to the complaint was sustained. Plaintiffs have appealed.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Desha Circuit Court. Sweet & Trippe brought suit against the Desha Dumber and Planing Company. A demurrer to the complaint was sustained. Plaintiffs have appealed. The complaint was substantially in the following language : The plaintiffs state that in 1887 their wives and co-plaintiffs, Sallie E. Sweet and Dizzie T. Trippe, were the owners of lot 9, in block O, in the towm of Arkansas City, Arkansas ; that these plaintiffs had, witli consent of the said Sallie E. Sweet and Dizzie T. Trippe, erected upon the said lot a large and commodious planing mill with steam boiler and…
1Opinion of the CourtHemingway, J.
1. Construe-tion of pleading.
Construing the complaint liberally, as the code provides, we think it may be said to state facts showing that a contract was made and broken by defendant, and to contain an allegation that plaintiffs were damaged by the breach in the sum of $10,000. From those facts springs a right of action maintainable in the circuit court ; if there was any defect in the manner of stating them, rendering the complaint vague or uncertain, it could have been reached by motion to make more definite and certain, but not by demurrer. Bushey v. Reynolds, 31 Ark. 657 ; Bush v. Cella,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Railway Co. v. WhitleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1891
- Bushey v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1877
- Bush v. CellaSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1889
3Cited by7 opinions
- Stitt v. Rat Portage Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- McClanahan v. Otto-Marmet Coal & Mining Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1914
- Reed Oil Company v. CainSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1925
- Sullivan v. WintersSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- Murrell v. HenrySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1902
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.