Worthington v. Curd & Co.
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Chicot Circuit Court in Chancery. Hon. John C. Murray, Circuit Judge. The rule that a party is bound by the defence he makes, in whatever court it may be, does not apply to cases in which defences are attempted that are not properly within the jurisdiction of the court in which the suit is pending. Judgments are conclusive between parties and privies in regard to matters that were directly at issue. 1 Greenl.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Chicot Circuit Court in Chancery. Hon. John C. Murray, Circuit Judge. The rule that a party is bound by the defence he makes, in whatever court it may be, does not apply to cases in which defences are attempted that are not properly within the jurisdiction of the court in which the suit is pending. Judgments are conclusive between parties and privies in regard to matters that were directly at issue. 1 Greenl. Eu. 528, 521); 7 Pick. 149; 17 Pick. 7; 2 Gall. 216; 6 Mass. 286; 1 Phil. Ev. 321, ti. 557. It is not necessary for a vendee to wait until he is actually evicted. He is to be…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Fairchild
In 1840, Abner Johnson sold to Worthington, the appellant, a large quantity of lands in Chicot county, and gave a deed of general warranty, for which Worthington was to pay him twenty-five hundred bales of cotton; two hundred and fifty bales a year. Ten notes or bonds were given, each for the last named amount of cotton, payable at the beginning of the successive years from the purchase. All were paid but the last two, falling due in 1849 and 1850. To avoid their payment, Worthing-ton filed his bill, alleging that the lands were subject to a stock-mortgage to the Real Estate Bank for twenty…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Frazier v. Bank of the StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1842
- Worthington v. Curd & Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1855
- Key v. HensonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1856
3Cited by2 opinions
- McIndoe v. MormanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1870
- Dunn v. MillsSupreme Court of Kansas · 1905