State v. Leatherwood
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Poinsett Chancery Court; E. D. Robertson, Chancellor; Contends that the sales were fraudulent and void, citing many authorities, but as the court does not go into the merits of the controversy, it is useless to state the points and authorities cited in the able and elaborate briefs of counsel. 1. This cause was heard upon the pleadings, depositions and oral evidence. ' The oral evidence is not in the record.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Poinsett Chancery Court; E. D. Robertson, Chancellor; Contends that the sales were fraudulent and void, citing many authorities, but as the court does not go into the merits of the controversy, it is useless to state the points and authorities cited in the able and elaborate briefs of counsel. 1. This cause was heard upon the pleadings, depositions and oral evidence. ' The oral evidence is not in the record. This court will presume that the evidence sustains the decree. 87 Ark. 232; 90 Id. 214; 95 Id. 379; 83 Id. 424; 80 Id. 579; 109 Id. 1; 38 Id. 477; 84 Id. 100. 2. Argue the…
1Opinion of the CourtWood, J.
The appellant, State of Arkansas, by its Attorney General, for the use and benefit of Bay Village and other Special School Districts instituted this suit against the appellees to set aside the sale of section 16, township 10 north, range 5 east, and section 16, township 11 north, range 5 east. The cases were almost identical and were consolidated under the statute for trial.
The complaints alleged in substance, that J. A. Bradsher, J. R. Wigginton, N. J. Hazel, W. M. Hazel, L. C. Going and Benjamin Harris entered into a conspiracy to defraud the appellant of the lands, and that through various…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bradley Lumber Co. v. HamiltonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1913
3Cited by3 opinions
- Weaver-Dowdy Co. v. BrewerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1917
- Blackford v. GibsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1920
- McKinney v. CaldwellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1952