Legal Opinion

Karnes v. Ramey

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided November 15, 1926PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Hart, J.,

(after stating the facts). This court is committed to the doctrine that an officer’s false return of service of process shall not preclude the defendant from showing the truth, in a proper proceeding, to be relieved from the burden of a judgment or decree based thereon. One who is aggrieved by a judgment rendered in his absence must show not only that he was not summoned, but also that he did not know of the proceeding in time to make a defense. State v. Hill, 50 Ark. 458, 8 S. W. 401; First National Bank v. Dalsheimer, 157 Ark. 464, 248 S. W. 575; and First National Bank of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. HillSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1887
  2. First National Bank v. DalsheimerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
  3. First National Bank of Manchester v. TurnerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1925

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Metcalf v. LangstonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1974
  2. Bay Convalescent Center, Inc. v. CarrollDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1977
  3. Woods v. QuarlesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1929
  4. Lambie v. W. T. Rawleigh Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1929
  5. Husband v. CrockettSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1938

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API