Legal Opinion
Mortensen v. Ballard
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Decided July 9, 1945No. 4-7708PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBobins, J.
The question for determination is the sufficiency of the following complaint filed by appellant in the lower court:
“Comes the plaintiff, M. Mortensen, and suing the above named defendants, for his cause of action alleges:
“That plaintiff is a resident of Pope county, Arkansas.
“That the defendant Evelyn Pearson Ballard is a resident of Pope county, Arkansas.
“That the defendant Pearson Hotel Company is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of Arkansas, with its principal office and place of business in Bussellville, Pope county, Arkansas.
' ‘ That prior to the 3rd day of March,…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Red Bud Realty Co. v. SouthSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
- McLaughlin v. City of HopeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1913
- Drury v. Armour & Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1919
- Cox v. SmithSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
- Sanders v. FlennikenSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1929
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Andres v. AndresCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1981
- McKim v. McLineySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1971
- Cherokee Carpet Mills, Inc. v. Worthen Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1978
- McKim v. McLineySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1971
- Tri-B Advertising, Inc. v. Arkansas State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1976
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.