Nattee v. Huff
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court, Third Division; G. W. Hendricks, Judge; When appellant tendered a reasonable fee he had the right to demand possession and replevin would lie. One.dollar was a reasonable fee; the demand for $5 was unreasonable, and the possession of the horse became unlawful. Replevin was proper when the impounder failed to comply with the law.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court, Third Division; G. W. Hendricks, Judge; When appellant tendered a reasonable fee he had the right to demand possession and replevin would lie. One.dollar was a reasonable fee; the demand for $5 was unreasonable, and the possession of the horse became unlawful. Replevin was proper when the impounder failed to comply with the law. Kirby’s Digest, § § 1407-8-9; 9 Ark. 389; 17 Id. 85; 94 Id. 54. See also 65 Ark. 448; 70 Id. 348. The court erred in its instructions. 1. The judgment is right on the evidence. The horse was lawfully in appellee’s possession and…
1Opinion of the CourtHumphreys, J.
These eases involve the same defendants and a construction of the same statutes, so one opinion will suffice in the two eases.
In No. 5080, appellant, Algia Flowers, brought suit against appellees in the Little Rock municipal court for a horse owned-by him which had been found in Fencing District No. 3, Pulaski County, and impounded by appellees.
The cause was tried in the municipal court and judgment was rendered in favor of appellees, from which an appeal was prosecuted to the circuit court of Pulaski County. The cause was there tried by the court sitting as a jury upon an agreed statement of…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Gregg v. HatcherSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
- City of Fort Smith v. DodsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1888
- White v. ClarksvilleSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Davis v. CalvertSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1856