Boyd Ex. v. Whitfield
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from, Lafayette Circuit Court. Hon. Thomas Hubbaed, Circuit Judge. 1. The complainant can only rely upon the doctrine of technical estoppel by matter of record, as a conclusive bar to any averment of the truth, contrary to the adjudication, i. e. that the title of Nancij Browder et als., was not superior or paramount to that derived by Whitfield, or those under whom he claims, from Easely.
Read the full summary
Appeal from, Lafayette Circuit Court. Hon. Thomas Hubbaed, Circuit Judge. 1. The complainant can only rely upon the doctrine of technical estoppel by matter of record, as a conclusive bar to any averment of the truth, contrary to the adjudication, i. e. that the title of Nancij Browder et als., was not superior or paramount to that derived by Whitfield, or those under whom he claims, from Easely. Being therefore against equity, such estoppels are not favored but only tolerated because of the interest which the public have in the end or cessation of every litigation. The doctrine is strictly…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice English
On the 10th February, 1851, Francis E. Whitfield filed a bill in the Lafayette Circuit Court, against Richard Boyd, as executor of William B. Easley and Lewis B. Fort, making substantially the following allegations:
About the year, 1836, Easley sent from Virginia, where he resided, into Arkansas, certain slaves, which he possessed and claimed as his absolute property, among which were Peggy and her four children, Royal, Beverly, Henderson and Hubbard.
In the year 1836 or 1837, Easley sold Peggy and her children, with several other slaves, in good faith, and for their full market value, to David…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Moss v. Riddle & CoSupreme Court of the United States · 1809
- Brewster v. CountrymanNew York Supreme Court · 1834
- Miner v. ClarkNew York Supreme Court · 1836
- Collingwood v. IrwinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1834
- Salle v. Light's Exr'sSupreme Court of Alabama · 1843
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Davis v. Van Camp Packing Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1920
- Nelson v. Armour Packing Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Delta Oxygen Co. v. ScottSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1964
- McKesson v. . MendenhallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1870
- Booth v. ScheerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1919
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.