Carraway v. Moore
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Woodruff Circuit Court. Gustav® Jon®s, Special Judge. The alleged will was not admissible for any purpose. 13 Am. & Eng. Enc. Law, 1038; Kirby’s Dig. § § 8033-8047. . The will was properly admitted in evidence.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Woodruff Circuit Court. Gustav® Jon®s, Special Judge. The alleged will was not admissible for any purpose. 13 Am. & Eng. Enc. Law, 1038; Kirby’s Dig. § § 8033-8047. . The will was properly admitted in evidence. Kirby’s Dig. § 8030; 51 Ark. 281; 66 Ark. 623; 64 Ark. 150. There were no allegations as to improvements made, and evidence of the same was properly excluded. 1 Greenleaf, Ev. c. x; 2 Ark. 513; 31 Ark. 203; 46 Ark. 132; 70 Ark. 505; 71 Ark. 484. Carraway got no greater title than the State had. 68 Ark. 157; 59 Ark. 150; 67 Ark. 184. There being no title in the State,…
1Opinion of the Court
BATT®®, J.
J. E. Moore brought an action against B. W. Carraway to recover a tract of land. He alleged that he is the owner of the land, and entitled to possession thereof; that the land was conveyed by the State of Arkansas to Theodore B. Mills, and by Mills to John Bray, who died, leaving a last will and testament, and thereby devised the same to Sarah Evelyn Bray, and she conveyed it to plaintiff.
Defendant answered, and denied that plaintiff was the owner of the land, and claimed title .thereto by virtue of a donation deed executed by the Commissioner of State Bands of the State of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Moss v. ShearCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
- Moore v. CareySupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
- St. Joseph's Convent v. GarnerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1899
3Cited by6 opinions
- Rucker v. MartinSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
- Gray v. ParksSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
- Fiddyment v. BatemanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
- Brown v. Kennedy Well Works, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1990
- Turley v. EvinsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1913
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.