Arkansas-Denning Coal Co. v. Yocum
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Franklin Circuit Court, Ozark District; James Cochran, Judge; It was error to refuse to give the instructions in writing when requested to do so. Art. 7, § 23, of the Constitution is mandatory, not directory merely. 47 Ark. 407; 34 Id. 257; 95 Ind. 170; 51 Ark. 177; 13 Id. 705; 72 Id. 398; 125 Ark. 248. No prejudice resulted from the failure to reduce the instructions to writing. 47 Ark. 407; 188 S. W. 407; 51 Ark. 181. No exceptions were saved.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Franklin Circuit Court, Ozark District; James Cochran, Judge; It was error to refuse to give the instructions in writing when requested to do so. Art. 7, § 23, of the Constitution is mandatory, not directory merely. 47 Ark. 407; 34 Id. 257; 95 Ind. 170; 51 Ark. 177; 13 Id. 705; 72 Id. 398; 125 Ark. 248. No prejudice resulted from the failure to reduce the instructions to writing. 47 Ark. 407; 188 S. W. 407; 51 Ark. 181. No exceptions were saved. STATEMENT BY THE COUET. Various plaintiffs below, appellees here, brought separate suits before a justice of the peace against the…
1Opinion of the Court
Wood, J.,
(after stating the facts). The appellants contend that the case should be reversed because of the refusal of the trial judge to give the instructions in writing after being requested to do so by the defendants. The record does not show that any objections were made and exceptions saved to the ruling of the court in refusing the request of appellants to reduce the instructions to writing and in instructing the jury orally.
“Exceptions to the action of the trial court in giving or refusing instructions must be made during the trial and brought into the record by bill of exceptions, and…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Plumlee v. St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1898
- Cammack v. Southwestern Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1908
3Cited by1 opinion
- DeQueen & Eastern Railroad v. PigueSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1918