Woolum v. Kelton
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Washington Circuit Court. J. M. Pittman, Judge. Woolum appealed from the judgment of a justice of the peace, refusing to quash an execution against him. His motion to quash alleged that the judgment on which the execution issued had been paid. The response of the execution creditor denied the alleged payment, and the issue thus formed was by consent tried in the Circuit Court by a jury.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Washington Circuit Court. J. M. Pittman, Judge. Woolum appealed from the judgment of a justice of the peace, refusing to quash an execution against him. His motion to quash alleged that the judgment on which the execution issued had been paid. The response of the execution creditor denied the alleged payment, and the issue thus formed was by consent tried in the Circuit Court by a jury. The verdict being against Woolum, the court rendered judgment against him and the sureties on his appeal bond, 'for the amount of the justice’s judgment on which the execution had issued. He…
1Per curiam
Execution: Motion to quash. The questions arising upon the motion to quash the execution, should have been tried by the court, but were, by consent, submitted to a jury. The evidence was conflicting, and their finding will not be disturbed.
But upon finding against appellant upon his motion to quash the executions, the court rendered judgment against him and the sureties upon an appeal bond for the amount of the justice’s judgments. This was error.
Reverse the judgment and enter judgment here against the appellant and his sureties for the costs of the justice’s and Circuit Court.
Reversed.
2Cited by5 opinions
- Twin City Bank v. J. S. McWilliams Auto Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1931
- Betterton v. AndersonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1926
- Hargis v. JordanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1932
- Metcalf v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- Hempstead County v. Hope Bridge Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1918