Arnold v. McNeill
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from the Gireuit Court of Dallas County. Hon. Theodobic F. Sorrells, Circuit Judge. The court erred in overruling the objections to the introduction of the deposition of Samuel Burke, because the deposition itself showed that Burke was incompetent as a witness. Greenlf. Ev., secs. 300, 393, 395; and because a party cannot be introduced to impeach any instrument executed by him, or deny that he has any title in the property.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Gireuit Court of Dallas County. Hon. Theodobic F. Sorrells, Circuit Judge. The court erred in overruling the objections to the introduction of the deposition of Samuel Burke, because the deposition itself showed that Burke was incompetent as a witness. Greenlf. Ev., secs. 300, 393, 395; and because a party cannot be introduced to impeach any instrument executed by him, or deny that he has any title in the property. Greenl. on Ev.,page 30, see. 24; Randal vs. Phillips, 3 Mason 378. We admit the general principle of law, that the warrantor of title to property, which is in…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice English
This was an action of replevin, in the detinet, brought by Bu-fas E. Arnold, and wife Mildred M. and by Arnold, as guardian of Joel, Samuel, and Malcom McNeill Burke, minors, in the Dallas Circuit Court, against Hector McNeill, for the recovery of a girl slave named Louisa,. The writ was executed upon defendant, but returned not found as to the slave. The defendant pleaded non detinet, property in himself, and the statute of limitations, and issues were made up to the pleas. Afterwards, the death of Mrs. Arnold was suggested, the cause ordered to abate as to her, and to progress in the names…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Bridge v. EgglestonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1817
- Baring v. ShippenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1809
- Twambly v. HenleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1808
- Beidelman v. FoulkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1836
- Ashley v. GuntonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1855
3Cited by1 opinion
- Clinton v. EstesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1859