Legal Opinion

Rankin v. Badgett

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided January 15, 1844PublishedCited by 1 opinion

This was an action of debt, determined in the Perry-Circuit Court, at September term, 1843, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the circuit judges. McLain & Badgett sued Rankin on a writing obligatory, dated 3d March, 1835, for $141. At the return term, Oct., 1841, Rankin demurred to declaration — was sustained — and plaintiff amended.

Read the full summary

This was an action of debt, determined in the Perry-Circuit Court, at September term, 1843, before the Hon. John J. Clendenin, one of the circuit judges. McLain & Badgett sued Rankin on a writing obligatory, dated 3d March, 1835, for $141. At the return term, Oct., 1841, Rankin demurred to declaration — was sustained — and plaintiff amended. At the next term, Rankin filed two pleas; both of which were demurred out, and thereupon filed another plea, sworn to, denying any consideration for the bond, and that it was obtained from him by fraud and misrepresentation, concluding to the country» The…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court,

Lacy, J.

The circuit court properly refused te» award a new trial. There is no error in the instructions given, or refused, to the jury. Under the state of pleading, the defendant took upon himself the burden ot proof by impeaching the consideration of the. bond, on the ground of fraud, and the court rightly held him to the issue. He was bound to show that the bond was procured by fraud, or was given without consideration. This he wholly failed to do, and the finding of the jury was fully warranted by the law and evidence.

New trial denied.

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Cheney v. HigginbothamSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1850

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

Powered by the Exa API