Vinsant v. Knox
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL PROM CRAWEORD CIRCUIT COURT. Whether the decision in Hawkins vs. Filldns, 24 Ark., 286, or that of Penn vs. Tollison, 26 Ark., 515, was the true interpretation of the law is immeterial.
Read the full summary
APPEAL PROM CRAWEORD CIRCUIT COURT. Whether the decision in Hawkins vs. Filldns, 24 Ark., 286, or that of Penn vs. Tollison, 26 Ark., 515, was the true interpretation of the law is immeterial. But we maintain that the Supreme Court, having by its decision in 1866, recognized .and given effect to the action *of the judicial department of the State government during the rebellion, their interpretation Of the law was authoritative and supreme, giving a rule of action which was binding upon individuals and courts alike, in all cases affected by it, until overruled and another interpretation of…
1Opinion of the CourtSearle, J.
The appellant’s intestate, Isaiah Yinsant, deceased, and one Marzahl, the latter as principal and the former as security, on the 20th of June, 1860, made and deliv«red their writing obligatory to the appellee, by which, eighteen months, after date, they jointly and severally promised to pay her five hundred dollars, etc. On the 9th of March, 1871, the appellee exhibited her account for allowance, founded on said writing obligatory, to the appellant, as administrator of the estate of the said Vinsant. The account was «examined and .disallowed; whereupon it was filed in the offi.ce of the clerk…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Board of Supervisors of Schuyler County v. People ex rel. Rock Island & Alton RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1860
- Swann v. BuckMississippi Supreme Court · 1866
3Cited by9 opinions
- Henderson v. RussellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1979
- Ferrell v. KeelSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
- Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. StateSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
- Perry v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1919
- Jackson v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.