Legal Opinion

Hooten v. Conklin

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided September 23, 1963No. 5-3037PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGeorge Eose Smith, J.

The question here is whether a fund in the registry of the chancery court, deposited in the form of a cash bond, may be reached by a writ of garnishment after the chancellor has filed an opinion awarding a portion of the fund to the garnishment debtor.

Crabtree, the garnishment debtor, brought suit in the Union Chancery Court to impress a lien upon oil and gas interests owned by the appellant Hays, a nonresident of the state. To keep the suit from interfering with the payment of oil runs Hays deposited $6,500 in court, as a cash bond for the payment of any judgment Crabtree might obtain. The…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Dunsmoor v. FurstenfeldtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. McGill v. RobbinsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1959
  3. Green v. RobertsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1906
  4. Orchard & Wilhelm Co. v. NorthNebraska Supreme Court · 1938
  5. Gaither v. . BallewSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1857

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Walker v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1966
  2. Maybee v. MachartWashington Supreme Court · 1988

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

Powered by the Exa API