Fort Smith & Van Buren District v. Scott
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Scott Circuit Court; Daniel Hon, Judge; 1. It was error to try the cause on the substituted answer. The whole case turned on the value as a bridge site, a claim not made in the original answer. It was also an abuse of discretion to refuse a continuance. 77 Mo. 26; 71 Ark. 222. 2. ° The fundamental error was in admitting incompetent testimony of the bridge value. 49 Ark. 381; 97 Id. 241; 52 S. E. 725; .18 App. Div. (N. Y.) 194; 26W.Va.672; 98 U. S. 403; 159 Pa.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Scott Circuit Court; Daniel Hon, Judge; 1. It was error to try the cause on the substituted answer. The whole case turned on the value as a bridge site, a claim not made in the original answer. It was also an abuse of discretion to refuse a continuance. 77 Mo. 26; 71 Ark. 222. 2. ° The fundamental error was in admitting incompetent testimony of the bridge value. 49 Ark. 381; 97 Id. 241; 52 S. E. 725; .18 App. Div. (N. Y.) 194; 26W.Va.672; 98 U. S. 403; 159 Pa. St. 99; 54 Atl. Rep. 339. 3. The whole doctrine of opinion evidence is an exception to the rale that witnesses must state…
1Opinion of the CourtKirby, J.
This is a proceeding by appellant to condemn ten acres of land of appellees on the Sebastian County side of the Arkansas River, opposite Jefferson Street in the city of Van Buten, for a site for a free bridge authorized to be constructed by the Fort Smith & Van Burén District, by a special act of the Legislature of 1909. (Acts 1909, p. 325.)
The answer set up that appellees owned and operated a ferry at the point, and that the right to continue its operation depended upon the ownership of the land on the banks of the river; that the land was more valuable by reason of the ferry right and…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Boom Co. v. PattersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- L. R. Junction Ry. v. WoodruffSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1887
- Smith v. Chicago & Western Indiana RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1882
- Russell v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
- Stuttgart & Rice Belt Railroad v. KocourekSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by49 opinions
- City of Little Rock v. SawyerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1958
- Baucum v. Arkansas Power & Light Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1929
- Arkansas State Highway Commission v. GriffinSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1967
- Arkansas State Highway Commission v. RobertsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1969
- Lazenby v. Ark. State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1960
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.