Brooks v. Hanauer
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Randolph Circuit Court. Hon. William C. Bevens, Circuit Judge. The court had no power to set aside the order for a new trial which had been granted at the previous terra. 2 Ark., 66; 5 lb. 25; 1 Eng. 101; 5 lb. 241; 14 Ark. 203. 1. The order for a new trial was not absolute, but conditional: it could not become absolute until the condition — payment of costs — had been complied with. 2. The ends of justice were obtained by the action of the court below, and this…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Randolph Circuit Court. Hon. William C. Bevens, Circuit Judge. The court had no power to set aside the order for a new trial which had been granted at the previous terra. 2 Ark., 66; 5 lb. 25; 1 Eng. 101; 5 lb. 241; 14 Ark. 203. 1. The order for a new trial was not absolute, but conditional: it could not become absolute until the condition — payment of costs — had been complied with. 2. The ends of justice were obtained by the action of the court below, and this court will not reverse where such reversal would work injustice. 19 Ark. 198; 17 lb. 326; 13 lb. 258; 5 Eng. 442.
1Opinion of the Court
Hon. H. Flanagin, Special Judge.
This is an action by petition and summons, by L. Hanauer, et al. vs. William P. Brooks on a promissory note.
There was judgment for the plaintiff below, and the defendant below made a motion for a new trial, which was submitted to the court, and by the court taken under advisement, and the next day an entry was made in the following words. “ On this day come the plaintiffs by Cain & Marvin and Byers, & Neely, their attorneys, and the said defendant, by A. C. Harris & Patterson, Rose & Gibbs, his attorneys ; and the court, being sufficiently advised in the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Rawdon v. RapleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1849
3Cited by1 opinion
- Moores v. WinterSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1899