Percifull v. Platt
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Lonoke Circuit Court. Hon. J. W. Martin, Circuit Judge. The case was, really, heard and determined as if upon demurrer. There was a demurrer to the answer, otherwise disposed of. The case turned on the same question of law, made by demurrer. There was no disputed question of fact, and no motion for .a new trial was necessary.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Lonoke Circuit Court. Hon. J. W. Martin, Circuit Judge. The case was, really, heard and determined as if upon demurrer. There was a demurrer to the answer, otherwise disposed of. The case turned on the same question of law, made by demurrer. There was no disputed question of fact, and no motion for .a new trial was necessary. See Bank v'. Conway, 13 Ark., 344; Jordan v. Poster, 11 Ark., 139 ;-Duggins v. Watson, 15 Ark., 118; also 21 Ark., 57; 16 ib., 309; 18 Ark., 384. A deed of trust does not come under the rigid rule,as to registration, laid down for mortgages in Swain v.…
1Opinion of the Court
STATEMENT.
Eakin, J.
This suit was begun on the twenty-seventh of March, 1877, by the appearance of defendants, without summons.
Platt sued Percifull and wife in ejectment, stating, in his complaint, that he is the sole surviving partner of the firm-of George F. Lovejoy & Co., and, “ as such,” is the owner, and entitled to the possession of the lands sued for, which are described. He says the lands were purchased by said, firm at an execution sale, made by the sheriff of Arkansas county. Without further particulars, he refers to the sheriff’s deed “ hereto attached and made part hereof.” The…
2Cited by26 opinions
- State v. LawrenceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1969
- Faulkner v. FeazelSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1914
- Kentucky Block Cannel Coal Co. v. SewellCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1918
- Spaulding Manufacturing Co. v. GodboldSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- Stricklin v. MooreSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.