Legal Opinion

Mills v. Sanderson

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided April 21, 1900PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal from Little River Circuit Court. Will P. Feazel, Judge. STATEMENT BY THE COURT. The appellant Mills contested the election of the appellee to the office of sheriff of Little River county, and gave a bond for costs, as required by the statute. Pending the cause, it seems, the bond for costs was lost or mislaid. The court ordered the contestant to give a new bond for costs, or substitute the original bond. This he failed to do.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Little River Circuit Court. Will P. Feazel, Judge. STATEMENT BY THE COURT. The appellant Mills contested the election of the appellee to the office of sheriff of Little River county, and gave a bond for costs, as required by the statute. Pending the cause, it seems, the bond for costs was lost or mislaid. The court ordered the contestant to give a new bond for costs, or substitute the original bond. This he failed to do. On motion of appellee his suit was by the court dismissed, with judgment against contestant for the costs, without notice to the sureties of the motion, and with…

1Opinion of the Court

Hughes, J.,

(after stating the facts.) There is evidence to sustain the finding of the court that the bond for costs was delivered to the clerk on Saturday, the 15th of September, 1894, and by him filed on Monday, the 17th of September, 1894. Was the judgment rendered without notice? When the sureties signed and delivered the bond, they were in court, and were bound to take notice of any proceedings in the case that affected them. Section 2704, Sandels & Hill’s Digest, provides that “if, upon the trial of any such suit as is mentionod in section 2702 [contests for offices named], judgment…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. Lawyer v. CarpenterSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1906
  2. Saline County v. KinkeadSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1907
  3. Huddleston v. CoffmanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
  4. Abbott v. ButlerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1947
  5. Cheney v. East Texas Motor Freight, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1961

2 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