Haynes v. Tunstall
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Trespass, on the case for false return, determined in Pulaski circuit court, in January, 1844, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the circuit judges. Tunstall sued Haynes.
Read the full summary
Trespass, on the case for false return, determined in Pulaski circuit court, in January, 1844, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the circuit judges. Tunstall sued Haynes. The declaration had but one count, setting out judgment in Conway county, against one Elisha W. Owens, for $1,500 debt, and $219, damages, with interest at 10 per cent.: issuance of ji. fa. thereon, and it having come to sheriffs hands, with proper averment of there being sufficient property whereof to have made the amount of \hefi.fa. That the sheriff neglected and refused to levy, and “falsely and deceitfully,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the court,
Lacy J.
There were several exceptions taken- or the trial below. Those that are material, relate to the exclusion oí evidence and the instructions of the court. The suit was brought for a false return against the sheriff,, and was tried upon the issues of not guilty, and nul tiel record. It was urged that a new trial should have been awarded, because after the issues were joined, the court tried the one of nul tiel record, and left the jury to determine the plea of not guilty. The question of nul tiel record was properly tried by the court, and although it may be somewhat…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Kimball v. MerrickSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1859
- St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. AndrewsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912