Kicks v. Britt
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Columbia Circuit Court. Hon. Shelton Watson Circuit Judge. A demand should have been made before suit brought. 1 Eng. 47; 3 Eng. 585. The plaintiff did not prove that he had the right to the immediate possession of the horse, (3 Shep. 373; 6 Eng. 475), it appearing that White had the loan of him for a time, which had not expired.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Columbia Circuit Court. Hon. Shelton Watson Circuit Judge. A demand should have been made before suit brought. 1 Eng. 47; 3 Eng. 585. The plaintiff did not prove that he had the right to the immediate possession of the horse, (3 Shep. 373; 6 Eng. 475), it appearing that White had the loan of him for a time, which had not expired. As the appellant has failed to incorporate in his bill of exceptions the instructions complained of in his motion for a new trial, this court cannot know what they contained, but must presume, in their absence, that the court below gave the instructions…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice English
Replevin in the dctinet, by Nimrod Britt, against James A. Hicks, for a horse. Pleas, non detinet, and property in the defendant, and two other persons, composing the firm of Hicks, Arrington & Co. Verdict for plaintiff, and motion for a new-trial, on the grounds that the court erred in giving instructions moved by plaintiff, and in refusing instructions asked for defendant; and that the verdict was contrary to law and evidence. Motion overruled, and bill of exceptions and appeal taken by defendant.
The evidence introduced upon the trial conduces to prove that the horse was the property of the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Wallace v. BrownSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1856
3Cited by2 opinions
- Shoemaker, Miller & Co. v. SimpsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1876
- Lowery v. LowerySupreme Court of Iowa · 1908