Schneider v. Coker
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court, Third Division; W. G. Hendricks, Judge; 1. The court erred in refusing to grant the prayer of appellant Schneider. The burden of proof was on the appellant to show nothing more than that the judgment was inconsistent with the record, and what the record was.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court, Third Division; W. G. Hendricks, Judge; 1. The court erred in refusing to grant the prayer of appellant Schneider. The burden of proof was on the appellant to show nothing more than that the judgment was inconsistent with the record, and what the record was. Kirby’s Digest, § 3107; 28 Cye. 15. 2. Appellant having shown conclusively that the judgment was inconsistent with the record, the burden shifted to the appellee to show that the recitals in the judgment were wrong, and that the judgment was not based on the return of the constable; and this must have…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, C. J.
This is an appeal by a surety on the plaintiff’s replevin bond from a judgment against him and the plaintiff for the return of the property sued for, or its value. The plaintiff, Mrs. Jennie Wallace, instituted the action before a justice of the peace against the appellee to recover possession of certain personal property; and after the order of delivery was placed in the hands of the sheriff, she executed and delivered to said officer a bond with appellant, Schneider, as security, as provided by statute (Kirby’s Digest, § 6857), undertaking that the plaintiff should duly prosecute the action…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Lowenstein v. McCaddenSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1890
- Martin v. TennisonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1892
- Dillard v. NelsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1906
3Cited by1 opinion
- Thomas v. SchaadSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1926