E. O. Barnett Bros. v. Porter
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Hot Spring Chancery Court; J. P. Henderson, Chancellor; 1. It was error to sustain the demurrer. The allegations of the amended answer show that appellee only asked $25 for the alleged wrongful taking of the mare but the jury awarded $50, or $25 more than he asked.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Hot Spring Chancery Court; J. P. Henderson, Chancellor; 1. It was error to sustain the demurrer. The allegations of the amended answer show that appellee only asked $25 for the alleged wrongful taking of the mare but the jury awarded $50, or $25 more than he asked. Á claimant cannot state one cause of action and recover on another. 31 S. W. 262; 8 Id. 562; 170 Id. 324. The affidavit of G-oodman by which this court was guided and the manner in which it was gotten into the record before this court in the case in 203 S. "W. 842 was a fraud practiced on this court. A court of chancery…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
The parties to this litigation were the parties to a suit brought originally as an action in replevin, and after a trial which resulted in a judgment in favor of Porter in the circuit court, Barnett Bros, prosecuted an appeal to this court. The judgment of the circuit court was affirmed by us in an opinion found reported in 134 Ark. 268, 203 S. W. 842. Thereafter Barnett Bros, brought this suit in the chancery court of Hot Spring County—the county in which the trial at law had occurred—to set aside the judgment which had been pronounced thereon and affirmed by this court.
The relief prayed for…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Barnett Bros. v. PorterSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1918
3Cited by1 opinion
- Barnett v. McClainSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1922