McWhorter v. Andrews
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Pulaski Circuit Court. J. W. Martin, Judge. The court erred in sustaining the demurrer to the original answer, and in striking out the second paragraph of defendant’s amended answer. It was insisted that the former action was in form ex contractu, while in this case it is ex delicto; and for that reason the former judgment could not be pleaded as res adjitdicata. Such is not the law. Under our system, forms of action are abolished (Mansf.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Pulaski Circuit Court. J. W. Martin, Judge. The court erred in sustaining the demurrer to the original answer, and in striking out the second paragraph of defendant’s amended answer. It was insisted that the former action was in form ex contractu, while in this case it is ex delicto; and for that reason the former judgment could not be pleaded as res adjitdicata. Such is not the law. Under our system, forms of action are abolished (Mansf. Dig., sec. 4914) ; but if not, the proposition is not tenable under the old system. The particular form of action or proceeding is immaterial,…
1Opinion of the CourtHemingway, J.
The appellee instituted this suit on the 18th day of July, 1887, seeking to recover of the appellant the value of thirty-eight bales of cotton, which it was alleged he had wrongfully converted.
The appellant interposed the following answer: “That the plaintiff ought not to maintain his action herein, because, on the 9th day of March, 1887, the said plaintiff commenced his action against the defendant in Hempstead circuit court for the sum of $1,520.00 for the conversion of the same cotton; and, on the 21st day of May, 1887, the defendant filed his answer denying the allegations of the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Sarah v. ReadIllinois Supreme Court · 1882
- Wheelock v. WheelwrightMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1809
- Curtis v. WardSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1850
- McEwen v. BigelowMichigan Supreme Court · 1879
- Bates v. CourtwrightIllinois Supreme Court · 1864
3Cited by7 opinions
- William Cameron & Co. v. HintonTexas Supreme Court · 1899
- Roth v. Merchants' & Planters' BankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1902
- Harris v. Whitworth, AdministratorSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1948
- Evins v. St. Louis & San Francisco RailroadSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
- Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. PearceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.