Legal Opinion

McDonald v. Smith Adm'r

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided June 15, 1867PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from Jackson Gireuit Court. Hon. L. L. Mack Circuit Judge. The judgment on the plea in abatement of Logan and Bell should have quashed the entire suit, and discharged McDonald as well as the other defendants. Edmondson vs. Carnal, 11 Ark., 284; 9 Ark., 159. If not, the summons clause in the attachment was good, (Hatheway vs. Jones, 20 Ark., 111.) And a discontinuance as to Bell and Logan was a discontinuance also as to McDonald.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Jackson Gireuit Court. Hon. L. L. Mack Circuit Judge. The judgment on the plea in abatement of Logan and Bell should have quashed the entire suit, and discharged McDonald as well as the other defendants. Edmondson vs. Carnal, 11 Ark., 284; 9 Ark., 159. If not, the summons clause in the attachment was good, (Hatheway vs. Jones, 20 Ark., 111.) And a discontinuance as to Bell and Logan was a discontinuance also as to McDonald. Frazier vs. State Bank, 4 Ark., 509, 546 ; 5 Ark., 140 ; 6 Ark., 92 ; 8 Ark., 456; 18 Ark., 361. The suit was pending against all three of the makers of the…

1Opinion of the Court

Mr. Chief Justice 'WalKee

delivered the opinion of the court.

On the 21st day of September, 1865, James S. Smith as the administrator of the estate of Pleasant G. Davenport, filed his petition in debt, in the circuit court clerk’s office, of Jackson county, against William M. Bell, Alexander LI. Logan and Alvin McDonald, upon which a summons was issued returnable to the October term, 1865, of said court, which as appears, was duly served upon the defendant McDonald, and returned not served upon the other defendants. Afterwards, on the 16th day of November, 1865, without filing an additional…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Rogers v. WatkinsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1975
  2. Coddington v. BrownSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1916

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

Powered by the Exa API