Owen v. Jones
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Lafayette Circuit Court. The Hon. Shelton Watson, Circuit Judge, presiding. Where improper evidence-is given, although it may be cumulative only, the judgment must, be reversed, because the court cannot say what effect such evidence may have had on the minds of the jury. Marguand vs. Webb, 16 John. 89. 2 Hall N. Y. Rep. 40. 3 Cowen 621. 12 Wend. 65. 4 Ark. 531. The letter of Dick & Hill was improperly admitted and the verdict is clearly excessive.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Lafayette Circuit Court. The Hon. Shelton Watson, Circuit Judge, presiding. Where improper evidence-is given, although it may be cumulative only, the judgment must, be reversed, because the court cannot say what effect such evidence may have had on the minds of the jury. Marguand vs. Webb, 16 John. 89. 2 Hall N. Y. Rep. 40. 3 Cowen 621. 12 Wend. 65. 4 Ark. 531. The letter of Dick & Hill was improperly admitted and the verdict is clearly excessive. The court should have excluded the evidence as to injury to the crop in 1842; for although as a general rule, the precise day need not…
1Opinion of the Court
Hon. Isaac Strain, Special Judge,
delivered the opinion of the. Court.
This is an action of trespass on the case, against the appellant’s intestate, for damages to the cotton and corn crops of the appellee, whilst in his employ, as his overseer.
Amongother evidence the plaintiffbelow, having proved the signature of Dick & Hill to be genuine, introduced theff letter, stai ting, “ There were 178 bales of cotton, shipped us per So. Western, in bad order, a good deal of it was delivered in bulk and had to be rebaled, 28 bales were picked, the expense of which was $64 87, 23 bales were remade, the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Arkansas State Highway Commission v. OrmondSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1969
- Hatfield Products & Cooperative Ass'n v. Mena Truck & Fruit Growers' Ass'nSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1924
- Arkansas State Highway Commission v. OrmondSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1969