Clay County v. Thornton
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Clay Circuit Court, Eastern District; Frank Smith, Judge; 1. No legal inquest can be held unless the coroner or justice acting as such swears and impanels the jury in the presence of the dead body, and coroner, and jury together view it; and where the requirements of the statute are not complied with, the county is not liable for the expense of holding the inquest.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Clay Circuit Court, Eastern District; Frank Smith, Judge; 1. No legal inquest can be held unless the coroner or justice acting as such swears and impanels the jury in the presence of the dead body, and coroner, and jury together view it; and where the requirements of the statute are not complied with, the county is not liable for the expense of holding the inquest. Kirby’s Dig., §,§ 794, 795, 796, 797; 9 Cyc. 988. 2. The drrty of the county court to carefully examine all claims for allowance against the county and to reject all found to be illegal applies to claims of physicians…
1Opinion of the Court
Hart, J. E.
W. Thornton and W. B. Wooldridge, physicians, each filed a claim against Clay County for the sum of $25.00 for professional services rendered in holding a post mortem examination at an inquest upon the body of a young lady, who died at a hotel in the town of Piggott in Clay County, Arkansas, in July, 1907. The coroner resides more than 20 miles from the place where the dead body was found, and, in compliance with section 822 of Kirby’s Digest, the inquisition was held by W. W. Pollard, the nearest justice of the peace, and by his direction E. W. Thornton and W. B. Wooldridge,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- St. Francis County v. CummingsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1892
- Marion County v. EstesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1906
3Cited by1 opinion
- Mount v. WelshOregon Supreme Court · 1926