McDonald v. Smith
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Columbia Circuit Court. Hon. Len B. Green, Circuit Judge. The testimony of the absent witness was legal and competent — the defendant having procured the property in suit by fraud in the trade. Paige 537; Root vs. French, 13 Wend. 570. The overruling the appellant’s motion for a continuance not being a reasonable exercise of the discretion of this court, it is subject to revision and correction on appeal. Hensley et al. vs. Tucker, 5 Eng. 528.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Fairchild
At the spring term, 1858, of the Columbia circuit court, the issues were made up in this case, it being an action of replevin for a mule, when the plaintiff filed an application for continuance, for the absence of a material witness. By that witness the plaintiff stated that he expected to prove that he had swapped the mule sued for, to the defendant, for a mare; that before this suit was begun, the mare had been proven and taken away from the plaintiff, as stolen property, and that he could prove such circumstances, as would tend to show that the defendant knew the mare to be stolen property…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Price v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1893
- Jones v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- Purcell Mill & Elevator Co. v. KirklandCourt Of Appeals Of Indian Territory · 1898