Campbell, Administrator v. Hammond
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1ConcurrenceSmith, J.
I concur in the view that appeals from the chancery court, sitting in probate, are tried here de novo. If they were not, then, without question, we could not disregard the incompetent testimony which was admitted without objection. We have an innumerable number of cases to the effect that objections not made to the competency of testimony in trials at law will be held to have been waived, and may not be raised for the first time on appeal to this court. The majority recognize this rule, but held that it is inapplicable in chancery appeals, for the reason that such appeals are tried here de…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Neff v. ElderSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1907
- Allen v. Ozark Land Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1892
- Fidelity-Phenix Fire Insurance v. FriedmanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
- Graves v. BowlesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1935
- Lisko v. Hicks.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1938
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.