Hopkins v. Harper
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Desha Circuit Court. Hon. John A. Williams, Circuit Judge. The filing of the amended complaint was the bringing, a new suit. 84 Ark., 144• Defendants voluntarily appeared and went to trial on the merits. Tillar, Stanley & Co. were made parties on their motion.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Desha Circuit Court. Hon. John A. Williams, Circuit Judge. The filing of the amended complaint was the bringing, a new suit. 84 Ark., 144• Defendants voluntarily appeared and went to trial on the merits. Tillar, Stanley & Co. were made parties on their motion. It was too late to object in the circuit court, and move to dismiss for want of jurisdiction. 4 Ark, 70; 14 ib., 234; 35 ib., 276 ; 25 ib., 99; 2 ib., 195. The case stood for trial de novo in the circuit court. If there were any defects, they should have been remedied by amendment. If a party refused to amend, it would be…
1Opinion of the CourtCockrill, C. J.
Tillar, Stanley & Co. sued the appellees before a justice of the peace upon a promissory note-executed by them to Jerry Hopkins, as administrator of the estate of Jesse Harrell, deceased, alleging that it had been assigned to them. On the day set for trial, the plaintiffs, through their attorneys, asked and were granted leave to permit Hopkins, as administrator, to prosecute the action upon the note. A formal complaint was thereupon filed, by Hopkins, as administrator, against the appellees. The appellees appeared to this action, represented to the court that Tillar, Stanley & Co. were…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Carden v. BaileySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1908
- German Investment Co. v. WestbrookSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911