Legal Opinion

Stroud v. Ryan

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided January 17, 1989No. 88-151PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

David Newbern, Justice.

This is an attorney malpractice case. The trial court granted a judgment on the pleadings in favor of attorney Jerry Ryan after concluding the pleadings showed the three-year statute of limitations, Ark. Code Ann. § 16-56-105 (1987), had run. The appellant, Richard A. Stroud, contends the pleadings did not show that the statute of limitations had run. We agree with the appellant’s argument, and therefore the case is reversed and remanded.

The complaint, as amended, alleged the following: Ryan negligently failed to make Stroud’s response to a writ of garnishment served on…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Guaranty Trust Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Amy v. WatertownSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
  3. Fidelity Union Casualty Co. v. Texas Power & Light Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1931
  4. Broadfoot v. City of FayettevilleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1899
  5. Riggs v. ThomasSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1984

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Chapman v. AlexanderSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1991
  2. Goldsby v. FairleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1992
  3. Rice v. RagsdaleCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2009
  4. Ford's Inc. v. Russell Brown & Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1989
  5. Hampton v. TaylorSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1994

13 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