Boyington v. Van Etten
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court. Wigbur P. Higg, Special Judge. 1. The bill of exceptions does not expressly state that it contains all the evidence, but it contains expressions from which it may be inferred that it contains all the, evidence, and this is sufficient. 35 Ark. 450. At least, there is evidence enough set out to show that the court erred in taking the case from the jury, and in directing a verdict for plaintiff. 57 Ark. 466 ; 39 id. 451; id. 491; id. 413. Prom…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court. Wigbur P. Higg, Special Judge. 1. The bill of exceptions does not expressly state that it contains all the evidence, but it contains expressions from which it may be inferred that it contains all the, evidence, and this is sufficient. 35 Ark. 450. At least, there is evidence enough set out to show that the court erred in taking the case from the jury, and in directing a verdict for plaintiff. 57 Ark. 466 ; 39 id. 451; id. 491; id. 413. Prom these authorities, if there was any legal evidence to establish the defenses relied on, the direction was improper. 2.…
1Opinion of the CourtBunn, C. J.
This is a suit and attachment against W. E. Boyington and V. P. Atwell, under the firm name and style of Boyington & Atwell, and also against the Cypress Dumber Company, of which the complaint alleges the said Boyington and the said Atwell were principal members. The allegations of the complaint are substantially to the effect that defendants are indebted to plaintiff in the sum of $6,195.92, for money loaned and advanced to them; that Boyington and Atwell were the principal subscribers to the capital stock of the Cypress Dumber Company, an alleged corporation organized under the laws of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Merrick v. . Van SantvoordNew York Court of Appeals · 1866
- Saltmarsh v. SpauldingMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1888
3Cited by8 opinions
- Love v. WilcoxTexas Supreme Court · 1930
- Williams v. St. Louis & San Francisco RailroadSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
- Jones v. LewisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- Gray v. MagnessSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1940
- Peacock Coal Co. v. Gaines Coal Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1928
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.