Tharp v. Page
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Hempstead Circuit Court. Rupus D. Hearn, Judge. The statement that the firm owed Mrs. Page $500 for services as bookkeeper was open to suspicion (64 Ark. 377), and the subpoena duces tecum should have been granted to bring the books into court. Oglesby's testimony was incompetent as hearsay.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Hempstead Circuit Court. Rupus D. Hearn, Judge. The statement that the firm owed Mrs. Page $500 for services as bookkeeper was open to suspicion (64 Ark. 377), and the subpoena duces tecum should have been granted to bring the books into court. Oglesby's testimony was incompetent as hearsay. The first instruction given for appellee was erroneous in that it withdrew from the jury the question of the ownership of the property. 14 Ark. 530; 16 Ark. 569; 31 Ark. 699; 37 Ark. 580; 59 Ark. 417; 24 Ark. 540; 33 Ark. 350; 30 Ark. 117; 45 Ark. 256. The burden was on the wife to show bona…
1Opinion of the CourtBattle, J.
Certain creditors of W. L. Page & Co. recovered judgments 'against them, and sued out executions, to satisfy which the sheriff, to whom they were' directed, levied upon a stock of groceries in Hope, in this state, as the property of W. L. Page. His wife, Emma R. Page, claimed the goods; and P. A. Tharp, W. A. Rhodes and Carl & Tobey Company executed five several bonds to the sheriff, by which they undertook to indemnify him “against all damages which he may sustain in consequence of the seizure or sale of said stock of groceries under execution; also to pay any claimant of the said goods the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Tharp v. PaigeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1903