Legal Opinion

Jones v. Pond & Decker Manufacturing Co.

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided May 28, 1906Published

Appeal from Mississippi Chancery Court; Bdward D. Robertson, Chancellor; statement by the court. The complaint in this case was filed by appellants to review and vacate a decree of the Mississippi Chancery Court, rendered at the March term, 1900, against them, divesting their interest 'in all of section 14, T. 10 S., R. 8 west, except 2.57 acres, and ■ quieting the title of appellees thereto.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Mississippi Chancery Court; Bdward D. Robertson, Chancellor; statement by the court. The complaint in this case was filed by appellants to review and vacate a decree of the Mississippi Chancery Court, rendered at the March term, 1900, against them, divesting their interest 'in all of section 14, T. 10 S., R. 8 west, except 2.57 acres, and ■ quieting the title of appellees thereto. Appellants, except Nannie C. Jones, the widow, were children and heirs at law of B. F. Jones. At the time of the rendition of the decree sought by this suit to be vacated, appellants, except Nannie C.…

1Opinion

ON REHEARING.

Hide, C. J.

Appellee seeks to have the judgment changed except as to Mrs. Adkins, and appellants seek to have it changed so as to permit her recovery. The .court has carefully gone into the case again, and adheres to the decision rendered. It is pointed out that an undenied allegation of the complaint is that Mamie Adkins, nee Jones, was a married woman at the time of the rendition of the original decree. It was sought to bring her within the 5th paragraph of section 4431, Kirby’s Digest, instead of the 8th paragraph, under which this recovery was sustained for all the Jones heirs…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Sparks v. FarrisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1902
  2. Richardson v. MatthewsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1894
  3. Rucker v. DixonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1906

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

Powered by the Exa API