Springfield Fire & Marine Insurance v. Hamby
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Nevada Circuit Court. Rufus D. Hearn, Judge. The court erred in refusing to amend the record entry of the judgment, so as to show the findings of fact on which it was based.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Nevada Circuit Court. Rufus D. Hearn, Judge. The court erred in refusing to amend the record entry of the judgment, so as to show the findings of fact on which it was based. If such recital of facts appeared, and the judgment was not supported thereby, it could be corrected on appeal, without motion for new trial or bill of exceptions. 46 Ark. 18; 31 S. W. 140; 26 Ark. 536; 26 Ark. 662; 55 Ark. 334. The court below had the power to make the amendment asked. 40 Ark. 224; 53 Ark. 250; 59 Ark. 54; 134 U. S. 136 — 143 et seg.; Freeman on Judg. §§71 and 72; ib. §§ 2, 75 76, 77.…
1DissentBunn, C. J.
This ease goes off on a question of practice, and I dissent from the opinion of the court on that question.
The language of our Code of Civil Practice (section 5837, Sand. & H. Dig.) is as follows, to-wit: “Upon trials of questions of fact by the court, he shall state in writing the conclusions of fact found, separately from the conclusions of law.”
It must be confessed that, were it not for the interpretation of this language given in a long and unbroken line of decisions, the same would appear to be very ambiguous. But these adjudications establish the fact that a statement of the conclusions…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Norris v. JacksonSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
- Emeric v. AlvaradoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
- Ogden v. GliddenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1859
- Briggs v. EgganSupreme Court of Kansas · 1877
- City of Owensboro v. WeirCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1893
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.