Legal Opinion

Heinemann v. Barfield

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided October 28, 1918PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court; D. H. Coleman, Judge;

1Opinion of the Court

-Wood, J.

This was a suit by Pattie Barfield as administratrix of the estate of R. H. Barfield, deceased, for the benefit of herself as widow, and Lusky Barfield, the next of kin of R. H. Barfield. The complaint alleged that she had been duly appointed administratrix of the estate of R. H. Barfield; that she was the widow of R. H. Bar-field, and that Lusky Barfield was their minor child; that R. H. Barfield, her husband, was made sick and after-wards died from the effects of poison caused by eating bread made from the flour which was sold to him by the appellant. The complaint alleged that the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Doyle v. Fuerst & Kraemer, Ltd.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1911
  2. Nelson v. Armour Packing Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
  3. National Cotton Oil Co. v. YoungSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Delta Oxygen Co. v. ScottSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1964
  2. Drury v. Armour & Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1919
  3. Burgess v. Sanitary Meat MarketWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1939
  4. Hercules Powder Co. v. RichCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1924
  5. S. H. Kress & Co. v. FergusonCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1933

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API