Titsworth v. Spitzer
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Logan Circuit Court. Hon. R. B. Rutherford, Circuit Judge. The onus probandi was upon the plaintiff (22 Ark., 396), and he must make out his case by competent testimony, (4 Ark., 91f). lie mast establish his right of possession as well as wrongful detention of the identical property sued for.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Logan Circuit Court. Hon. R. B. Rutherford, Circuit Judge. The onus probandi was upon the plaintiff (22 Ark., 396), and he must make out his case by competent testimony, (4 Ark., 91f). lie mast establish his right of possession as well as wrongful detention of the identical property sued for. (17 Ark., 54.9; 3 JEng., 519.) Where there is no evidence to support the finding, this court will grant a new trial. 5 Ark., 61¡,0; 14 lb., 202. A failure to clearly identify the property is fatal to plaintiff’s case. Where a party has introduced no legal testimony tending to sustain a…
1Opinion of the Court
English, O. J.
On the sixteenth of December, 1881, Ignatius Spitzer and Isadore Sugarman brought replevin •against E. N. Titsworth, before a justice of the peace of Logan County, for three bales of cotton described as marked “ J. Iv. with drop block [u],” of which the plaintiffs claimed to be the owners and entitled to immediate possession, and which they alleged defendant wrongfully detained from them.
The cotton was seized under the writ, bonded by defendant, and he denied the title of plaintiffs, and alleged property in himself.
The plaintiffs obtained judgment before the justice, defendant…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Hays v. DickeySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1899