Willard v. Willard
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Marion Chancery Court; Ben F. Mc-Mahan, Chancellor; 1. The affidavit was sufficient for a warning order. Kirby’s Dig. % 6055; 47 Ark. 48; 194 S. W. 1025. The affidavit was a substantial compliance with the law. 2. Plaintiff should have been allowed to amend the affidavit, if deemed insufficient. Kirby’s Digest, § 6145, 345; 34 Ark. 44; 33 Id. 406; 47 Id. 31, 49; 34 Id. 682; 32 Id. 406; lb. 278. 1. The affidavit was not sufficient.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Marion Chancery Court; Ben F. Mc-Mahan, Chancellor; 1. The affidavit was sufficient for a warning order. Kirby’s Dig. % 6055; 47 Ark. 48; 194 S. W. 1025. The affidavit was a substantial compliance with the law. 2. Plaintiff should have been allowed to amend the affidavit, if deemed insufficient. Kirby’s Digest, § 6145, 345; 34 Ark. 44; 33 Id. 406; 47 Id. 31, 49; 34 Id. 682; 32 Id. 406; lb. 278. 1. The affidavit was not sufficient. Kirby’s Digest, § 6055; 194 S. W. 1026; 37 L. B. A. (N. S.) 206, 211; 136 Pac. 720; 92 N. E. 266; 91 Id. 781. 2. The court properly held that plaintiff…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
Appellant, who was the plaintiff below, alleged in her complaint the existence of statutory grounds for a divorce. The complaint also alleged that “defendant is now a non-resident of the State of Arkansas, his postoffice address being West Plains, Missouri.” There was an affidavit for a warning order, in which it was stated that the defendant was a non-resident of the State of Arkansas. A motion to quash the warning order and proof of publication was filed which, for cause stated “that the affidavit of the plaintiff upon which the warning order is based is insufficient in that it states that…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Farmers' Shipping Ass'n of Sinai v. NordgrenSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1929
- Breckenridge v. Weber Dry Goods CompanySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1925
- Miller v. FearisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1931
- Breckenridge v. Weber Dry Goods CompanySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1925