Buchanan v. Halpin
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
Hart, C. J.,
(after stating the facts). It is sought to uphold the judgment of the circuit court upon the ground that Buchanan did not file any motion for a new trial, and that there is therefore nothing presented for review here, under our rules of practice. We cannot agree with counsel for the defendants in this contention. This court has held that neither a motion for a new trial nor a bill of exceptions is necessary where the error sought to be reviewed appears from the judgment.record itself. Burns v. Harrington, 162 Ark. 162, 257 S. W. 729. In Miller v. Tatum, 170 Ark. 152, 279 S. W.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Miller v. TatumSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1926
- Burns v. HarringtonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1924
- Moses v. KearneySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1876
3Cited by7 opinions
- Wells v. PurcellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1979
- Suit v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1947
- Clark v. CollinsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1948
- Street Improvement District No. 113 of Hot Springs v. MooneySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1942
- Oil Fields Corp. v. CubageSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1930
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.