Legal Opinion · Dissent

Stuckey v. Bank of Trumann

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided November 16, 1970No. 5-5337Published

1DissentJohn A. Fogleman, Justice

I would agree that a decree rendered only upon the evidence heard by the court after all parties had rested should be affirmed. I cannot agree, however, that either the judgment on the pleadings in favor of Vandiver or the sustaining of the bank’s demurrer was proper.

A motion for judgment on the pleadings is nothing more than a belated demurrer. Walker v. Von Wedel, 108 Okla. 292, 237 P. 86 (1925); Hirt v. Bucklin State Bank, 153 Kan. 194, 109 P. 2d 171 (1941); State v. Skagit River Navigation & Trading Co., 181 Wash. 642, 45 P. 2d 27 (1935); Art Bronze & Iron Works v. Beaman, 199 N. C. 537,…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Erickson v. StarlingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  2. Dixon v. FlukerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1942
  3. Power v. GumMontana Supreme Court · 1886
  4. Cole v. ThackerSupreme Court of Kansas · 1944
  5. Hirt v. Bucklin State BankSupreme Court of Kansas · 1941

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API