Springfield Business College v. Stephens
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Clay Circuit Court, Western District; R. II. Dudley, Judge; 1. In view of the undisputed facts as disclosed by the evidence, the verdict is contrary to the law and the evidence. 2. The court erred in admitting Wiliam Stephens’ testimony to go to the jury, and the verdict is contrary to law. 28 Ark. 550. 3. The instructions are clearly error in submitting undisputed facts to a jury. 69 Ark. 489; 67 Id. 147. 4. Taylor was the agent and president of the college…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Clay Circuit Court, Western District; R. II. Dudley, Judge; 1. In view of the undisputed facts as disclosed by the evidence, the verdict is contrary to the law and the evidence. 2. The court erred in admitting Wiliam Stephens’ testimony to go to the jury, and the verdict is contrary to law. 28 Ark. 550. 3. The instructions are clearly error in submitting undisputed facts to a jury. 69 Ark. 489; 67 Id. 147. 4. Taylor was the agent and president of the college corporation, and his contracts bound the Springfield Busniess College. The instructions are in direct,conflict with the…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, C. J.
This action was commenced by appellant before a justice of the peace of Clay County, and was tried there on the right of. action asserted, by appellant and a counterclaim of appellee. On appeal to the circuit court it was tried anew, and judgment was in favor of appellee.
The errors complained of are such as must be shown in a bill of exceptions. The record is in substantially the same condition as was the record in the case of Berger v. Houghton, 84 Ark. 342, where we decided that the condition of the record was too uncertain for us to determine what the bill of exceptions contained, and that…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- London v. HutchensSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1906
- Berger v. HoughtonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1907