Cummings v. Boyles
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Per curiam
The appellees, within the time allowed for the filing of a petition for rehearing, filed a motion for clarification of the opinion, which is in substance a petition for rehearing.' It is contended that the court was in error in modifying- the chancellor’s decree and that the decree should have been affirmed.
This contention is well taken. The modification was based upon a finding that part of Beaver Dam Island had formed within the appellants’ original boundaries and, therefore, belonged to them by operation of Ark. Stat. Ann. § 10-202 (Repl. 1956). That theory of the case was not argued by…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Johnson v. GammillSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1959
- Bowling v. StoughSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
3Cited by23 opinions
- Killam v. Texas Oil & Gas Corp.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1990
- Burks Motors, Inc. v. International Harvester Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1971
- Country Gentleman, Inc. v. HarkeySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1978
- Deaver v. Faucon Properties, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 2006
- Hill v. White-RodgersCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1984
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.