Legal Opinion

Louisiana Oil Refining Corp. v. Yelton

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided December 4, 1933No. 4-3219 and 4-3288PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Johnson, C. J.,

(after stating* the facts). Appellants first urge that the verdict against each appellant is not supported by the testimony. The basis for appellant’s contention as to no liability against McKewen is put upon the following grounds:

That MeKewen, prior to procuring the warrant of arrest, gave a full and fair statement of all the known facts to the public prosecutor, and he followed this advice. It suffices to say, in reference to this contention, that MeKewen’s testimony is flatly contradicted by that of the public prosecutor. This officer was a witness in the case and testified…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Fordyce v. NixSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1893
  2. Railway v. HallSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1890
  3. Kable v. CareySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1918
  4. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. WilsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1902
  5. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. WatersSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Farm Service Cooperative, Inc. v. Goshen Farms, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1979
  2. Malvern Brick & Tile Co. v. HillSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1961
  3. Malvern Brick & Tile Co. v. HillSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1961

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

Powered by the Exa API