Legal Opinion

Adkins v. Lacy

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided May 5, 1900PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court, Second Division. Joseph W. Martin, Judge. Unless an attachment be sued out maliciously, no damages not compensatory merely can be recovered; and all in excess thereof were erroneously allowed in this case. 34 Ark. 710; 51 Ark. 382; 37 Ark. 608; 55 Ark. 332; 39 Ark. 387; 58 Ark. 29; 65 Ark. 537; 21 Ark. 451; 34 Ark. 184.

1Opinion of the CourtBattle, J.

It has been repeatedly held by this court that, unless an order of attachment has been sued out maliciously, the defendant in the attachment is entitled to recover of the plaintiff no damages, except compensatory, on account of the order of attachment having been wrongfully issued. Holliday v. Cohen, 34 Ark. 710; Goodbar v. Lindsley, 51 Ark. 382.

The only loss the evidence shows that the plaintiff in this case suffered on account of the order of attachment sued out against him by the defendant was the value of the use of his team for two days and his loss of time. The evidence does not show…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Rodgers v. CadesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912

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

Powered by the Exa API