Martin v. Webb
Supreme Court of Arkansas
This was an action of assumpsit, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in September, 1842, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the circuit judges. Webb sued Martin & Yan Horn.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit, determined in the Pulaski Circuit Court, in September, 1842, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the circuit judges. Webb sued Martin & Yan Horn. The declaration contained a special count for divers medicines, delivered to the defendants to sell, on commission, and pay over the proceeds, less 15 per cent, for selling, or to return the medicines; and assigned, for breach, that the parties did not sell them or return them, although requested, &c. There was also a money count, and an account stated. Issue on the plea of non assumpsit was formed, and the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Paschal, J.
There has been some conflict in the decision of the State Courts, on the question of compelling a peremptory non-suit, where a party has failed to make out his case. We are disposed to adopt the doctrine settled by the Supreme Court of the United States. In the case of Crane vs. The Lessee of Morris, that Court say: “ This point has been repeatedly settled by the Supreme Court of the United States, and is not now open to controversy.” Elmore vs. Grimes, 1 Pet. 471. A non-suit may not be ordered, in any case, by the Court, without the consent and acquiescence of the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- D'Wolf v. RabaudSupreme Court of the United States · 1828
- Doe on the Demise of Elmore v. GrymesSupreme Court of the United States · 1828
- Safford v. StevensCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1828
3Cited by5 opinions
- Cowan v. PatrickSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1969
- Hill, McLean & Co. v. RuckerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1854
- State Bank v. FowlerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1853
- Bryan v. PinneyArizona Supreme Court · 1889
- Ringo v. FieldSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1845