Ball v. Kuykendall
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Error to the Craivford Circuit Court. This was an action originally instituted before a Justice of the Peace, and founded on a writing obligatory. The process was served on Kuykendall alone, against whom judgment was entered by default, and from which he took an appeal to the September term of the Circuit Court.
Read the full summary
Error to the Craivford Circuit Court. This was an action originally instituted before a Justice of the Peace, and founded on a writing obligatory. The process was served on Kuykendall alone, against whom judgment was entered by default, and from which he took an appeal to the September term of the Circuit Court. At which time, as is stated by the record, he Sled a plea in abatement, alleging that the plaintiff, who had sued byname of B. B. Ball, “ was, when the suit was commenced, called and known by the name of Bennett B. Ball, and not B. B. Ball.” The plaintiff in error moved to strike out…
1Opinion of the CourtDickinson, Judge
That the defendant had a right to appeal and was regularly in the in the Circuit Court is not controverted. The Rev. Ark. Stat., sec. 172,p. 515, declares “that no appeal shall be allowed unless the applicant, or some other person for him, shall make and file with the Justice an affidavit that th.e appeal is not taken for the purpose of delay, but that justice may be done, and section 176 , requires the court to “ hear, try, and determine the same anew, on its merits, without regard to any error, defect, or other imperfection in the proceedings of the Justice.v
All pleas in abatement (unless…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Turk v. MayberrySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- Farmers' Nat. Bank of Vinita v. First Nat. Bank of Pryor CreekSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
- German Investment Co. v. WestbrookSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911