McClintock v. Lankford
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Prairie Chancery Court, Southern District; John M. Elliott, Chancellor; STATEMENT OF FACTS. On November 3, 1919, J. M. McClintock and F. A. Hipolite brought this suit in equity against Eugene Lank-ford to set aside a decree of the chancery court purporting to have been rendered on the 27th day of June, 1918, during the vacation of the court.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Prairie Chancery Court, Southern District; John M. Elliott, Chancellor; STATEMENT OF FACTS. On November 3, 1919, J. M. McClintock and F. A. Hipolite brought this suit in equity against Eugene Lank-ford to set aside a decree of the chancery court purporting to have been rendered on the 27th day of June, 1918, during the vacation of the court. The chancery decree which is the basis of this lawsuit is as follows: ‘ ‘ This cause coming on to be heard on the 20th day of May; being an adjourned day of the regular April term, 1918, of the chancery court for Southern District of Prairie…
1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.
(after stating the facts). This court has held that in the. absence of statutory provisions providing for the rendition of decrees in vacation that a decree in chancery rendered in vacation, although entered on the judgment record, is a nullity. The court has held further that parol evidence is admissible to show that a decree which appears regular on its face was actually rendered in vacation and is consequently a nullity. Jackson v. Becktold Ptg. & Book Mfg. Co., 86 Ark. 591, and cases cited.
In this State we have a statute relating to the practice of taking cases under advisement and…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Jackson v. Becktold Printing & Book Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1908
- Turpin v. BeachSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- Holman v. LowranceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
3Cited by2 opinions
- Bradshaw v. SullivanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
- Enterprise Sales Co. v. BarhamSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1980