Danley v. Robbins' Heirs
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Ebkor to Pulaski Circuit Court. Absent, Ringo, Chief Justice. In this case several bills of exceptions were taken at the trial by the plaintiff in error. He subsequently moved for a new trial, without incorporating the evidence, otherwise than by his bill of exceptions. The case was argued here at full length, by Pike for the plaintiff, and Tkapnall & Cocke, Ashley & Watkins, contra.
Read the full summary
Ebkor to Pulaski Circuit Court. Absent, Ringo, Chief Justice. In this case several bills of exceptions were taken at the trial by the plaintiff in error. He subsequently moved for a new trial, without incorporating the evidence, otherwise than by his bill of exceptions. The case was argued here at full length, by Pike for the plaintiff, and Tkapnall & Cocke, Ashley & Watkins, contra. It is unnecesssarv to refer to the argument, except so far as it relates to the point on which the case was decided. We contend that the motion for a new trial is virtually a waiver of the exceptions. “If any…
1Opinion of the CourtLacy, Judge
The defendant below took several exceptions to the opinion of' the court during the progress of the case, and afterwards moved for a new trial. The question to be determined is, is the plaintiff entitled to a motion for a new trial while his exceptions are in ? This point has been expressly ruled by a series of adjudicated cases of too high weight and authority to be now questioned and disturbed. The policy and necessity of the rule is obvious, and rests for its support upon one of the most important and salutary principles in the whole science of pleading. In Cunningham et al. vs. Bell, et…
2Cited by5 opinions
- McClellan v. PyeattCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1892
- Prairie Creek Coal Mining Co. v. KittrellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
- Dunnegan v. ByersSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1856
- Berry v. SingerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1850
- State Bank v. ConwaySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1853