Hay v. Bank of the State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
This was an action of debt, determined in the Independence Circuit Court, in June, 1842, before the Hon. Thomas Johnson, one of the circuit judges. The Bank of the State sued Bay, Greer, and Holson on a bond, and process issued to Crittenden, where it was served on Hay and Greer, who severed in their pleadings. Hay ultimately pleaded in abatement the issuance of but one writ, to Crittenden; and Greer pleaded nil del corporation.
Read the full summary
This was an action of debt, determined in the Independence Circuit Court, in June, 1842, before the Hon. Thomas Johnson, one of the circuit judges. The Bank of the State sued Bay, Greer, and Holson on a bond, and process issued to Crittenden, where it was served on Hay and Greer, who severed in their pleadings. Hay ultimately pleaded in abatement the issuance of but one writ, to Crittenden; and Greer pleaded nil del corporation. Demurrer to Hay’s plea sustained, and judgment respondeat ouster, and that plaintiff recover against him all her costs herein expended, up to the present time.”…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Ringo, C. J.
Every principle of law involved by the proceedings and adjudication of the court below in this case, has been expressly ruled by this court against the plaintiff in error in cases heretofore decided.
The plea in abatement is clearly within the principles expressly adjudged by this Court in the case of Tucker et al. vs. The Real Estate Bank, 4 Ark. Rep. 431; and the plea of Greer within that held in the case of Mahony et al. vs. The Bank of the State, 4 Ark. Rep. 620. The judgment given against the plaintiff in error, upon the demurrer to his plea being sustained, for…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Mahony v. Bank of the StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1842
- Fulton v. HuntSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1841
- Tucker v. Real Estate BankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1842
3Cited by1 opinion
- S. C. Transport Company v. BarnesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1935