Pratt v. Frazer
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Pulaski Chancery Court; John B. Martineau, Chancellor; STATEMENT OF THE COURT. This suit was instituted in. the Pulaski Chancery Court by George P. Frazer against John R. Pratt. The complaint in substance alleges that the parties to the suit formed a partnership for the purpose of selling stock for an insurance company, and that by its terms they shared equally the profits and losses.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Pulaski Chancery Court; John B. Martineau, Chancellor; STATEMENT OF THE COURT. This suit was instituted in. the Pulaski Chancery Court by George P. Frazer against John R. Pratt. The complaint in substance alleges that the parties to the suit formed a partnership for the purpose of selling stock for an insurance company, and that by its terms they shared equally the profits and losses. The defendant, Pratt, demurred to the complaint because it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and because.the court did not have jurisdiction to hear and determine the…
1Opinion of the Court
Hart, J.,
(after stating the facts). “Where a cause has proceeded to final adjudication without judgment of the court upon demurrer filed in same, the demurrer will be considered to have been waived.” Kiernan v. Blackwell, 27 Ark. 235. As far as the record discloses, the court was never called upon to rule upon the demurrer, and the cause may be said to have proceeded to final adjudication in the chancery court by consent of the parties.
The rule is well settled that it is only where the complaint discloses on its face the court’s total lack of jurisdiction that the defect can not be waived and…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Collins v. Paepcke-Leicht Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Rector v. RobinsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Culley & Son v. EdwardsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1884
- Herman Kahn Co. v. BowdenSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1906
- Buford v. LewisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1908
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Harbottle v. Central Coal & Coke Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1918
- Hill v. McClintockSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1928
- Kaplan v. SchererSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1943
- Street v. ShullSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1933
- Dover v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1924
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.