Bush v. Visant
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Arkansas Circuit Court. Hon. X. Plaintiffs muniments of title were not admissible in evidence, because— 1. The Justice had no jurisdiction to create “a lien on land” and condemn the same to be sold, &c.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Arkansas Circuit Court. Hon. X. Plaintiffs muniments of title were not admissible in evidence, because— 1. The Justice had no jurisdiction to create “a lien on land” and condemn the same to be sold, &c. See latter clause sec. 40, Art. 7, Const. 1874. Said pretended judgment was not entered in the docket of the Circuit Court for common law judgments- Act Jan’y., 1875; Acts of 1874-5, p. 111. 2. Defendant was a non-resident and the attorneys appointed by the Court could not enter an appearance, &c. The defendant was not in Court. Gantt’s Dig., sec. 4727. 3. In a suit by attachment…
1Opinion of the Court
STATEMENT.
English, C. J.
The material facts disclosed by the transcript in this case, stated in the order in which they occurred, follow:— ^
On the 22nd February, 1878, Crockett & Yancey commenced suit by attachment before a Justice of the Peace of Arkansas county, upon an account for $50. against Willis P. Bush, a non-resident. On the filing of the account, &g., an attachment was issued to a Constable, a warning order made, and Freeman & Johnson appointed attorneys ad litem for the non-resident defendant, Bush.
The Constable returned upon the attachment that he could find no personal property…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Frank v. FrankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
- Benjamin v. BirminghamSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1887
- Sinclair Refining Co. v. BoundsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1939
- Hanson v. MorrisonIdaho Supreme Court · 1917
- Hawkins v. WillsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1892