Legal Opinion

Pierce v. Sicard

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided March 5, 1928PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Hart, C. J.,

(after stating the facts). It is first soug’ht to reverse the judgment because the circuit court erred in refusing to grant the petition of the plaintiffs for a change of venue.

Section 10341 of Crawford & Moses’ Digest provides that the venue of civil actions shall not be changed unless the court or judge to whom the application for change of venue is made finds that the same is necessary to obtain a fair and impartial trial of the cause. In construing this statute in St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Ry. Co. v. Reilly, 110 Ark. 182, 161 S. W. 1052, the court said:

“The statute…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Taylor v. . Commercial BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1903
  2. Rogers v. HarrisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1919
  3. Thompson v. DouglassWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1891
  4. McLean v. Southwestern Casualty Ins. Co. of OklahomaSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
  5. Blackburn v. MorrisonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Grigsby v. MabryDistrict Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1983
  2. Needham v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1949
  3. Janssen v. Carolina Lumber Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1952
  4. Stine v. SandersCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1999
  5. Undem v. First National BankCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1994

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API