Ouachita Valley Bank v. Pullen
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the CourtButler, J.
The following statement is made in the brief of counsel for the appellees: “The question of law and fact in these two interventions are s'o nearly similar that they were tried together in the lower court, and this appeal covers both interventions,” and on this theory counsel for all parties have treated the facts as interchangeable, and applied to each the same principles of law. We think, however, there is an essential and vital difference in the facts established by the evidence regarding the formation and conduct of the Bank of Smackover from that of the Louann State Bank, that the law…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- American Southern Trust Co. v. McKeeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
- Minneapolis Fire & Marine Mutual Insurance v. NormanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Richeson v. National BankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
- Wilson v. DavisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1919
- City Electric Street Railway Co. v. First National BankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1898
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.