Legal Opinion

Meyer v. Eichenbaum

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided February 6, 1939No. 4-5361PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBaker, J.

The appellant filed his suit in the chancery court of Garland county, seeking the construction of a will made by his father, and, upon a determination of the issues against his contentions, this appeal has been prayed.

It may he said in the beginning of our discussion of this case that apparently the appellant has assumed that it is the duty of the appellate court to explore the record and to determine from such exploration if there are errors to justify interference. Such is not the rule. The appellant has the burden, that may not be evaded, of showing that there is error, or. an affirmance…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Browning v. Ashbrook'sCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1917
  2. Roberts's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1880
  3. Hunt v. WilliamsIndiana Supreme Court · 1891
  4. Thomson's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1879

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Meyer v. EichenbaumSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1941
  2. Smith v. SmithWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1950
  3. Cash v. CashSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1982
  4. Opinion No., Arkansas Attorney General Reports2000
  5. Smith v. SmithWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1950

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API