Legal Opinion · Dissent

Derrick v. Rock

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided February 26, 1951No. 4-9362Published

1DissentEd. F. McFaddin, Justice

I agree with the majority in its holding that the judgment should be reversed in the case of Rock v. Flowers, on the ground that Rock insisted on bringing the insurance matter into the case. But I respectfully dissent from so much of the majority holding as reverses the judgment obtained by Tindall against Flowers. This dissent is for several reasons : Tindall did not commit the error that brought the insurance angle in the case; the Court told the jury not to consider the insurance matter in the Tindall case; and we have repeatedly held that cautionary instructions will cure prejudicial…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Murray v. JacksonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1930
  2. Malco Theatres, Inc. v. McLainSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1938
  3. Neely v. GoldbergSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API