St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. Clemons
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Dissent
JohN A. FoglemaN, Justice,
dissenting.. I dissent only as to the remand of this case.
I agree with the academic statements of the majority with reference to remand of a law case-for a new ■trial. The great' difficulty is that none of them are applicable here. The statement from Pennington v. Underwood, 56 Ark. 53, 19 S. W. 108, is dictum. The court entered judgment for the defendant here instead of remanding.
I have found two cases where this court, under what were declared to be unusual circumstances, remanded a case for a new trial upon a reversal for failure of the trial court to direct a…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Woodard v. HollidaySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1962
- Pennington v. UnderwoodSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1892
- Missouri Pacific Railroad Company v. MooreSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1940
- Twin City Amusement Company v. SalaterSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1963
- Hayes Bros. Flooring Co. v. CarterSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1966
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.