Legal Opinion · Dissent

Thornbrough v. Mayner

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided April 22, 1963No. 5-2877Published

1DissentJim Johnson, Associate Justice

In reversing this case the majority has indulged an assumption that is, in my view, contrary to the record. The majority has assumed the judgment which the trial court set aside is valid on its face, when in fact the record reveals unequivocably that it is not prima facie correct or valid on its face. The law on this question has long been settled by Woodburn v. Driver, 81 Ark. 333, 99 S. W. 384 (83 C.J.S. p. 794), where this court held that a judgment in a summary proceeding must be such as is authorized by law. Was this judgment authorized by law!

The record reveals that the Administrator of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Files v. Robinson & Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1875
  2. Prairie Creek Coal Mining Co. v. KittrellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1913
  3. Woodburn v. DriverSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1907

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

Powered by the Exa API