Legal Opinion · Dissent

Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. v. Howell

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided February 12, 1968No. 5-4440Published

1DissentCarleton Harris, Chief Justice

I think the court erred in permitting the unrecorded plat to be offered as evidence; in my opinion, it was not at all admissible, and I think that the jury, in its deliberations, undoubtedly could not belp but consider tbis plat. In Arkansas Louisiana Gas Company v. Lawrence, 239 Ark. 365, 389 S. W. 2d 431, tbis court reversed an award to tbe appellee, because of tbe introduction of an unau-tbenticated private plat. No subdivision existed, and we quoted from 32 C. J. S., Evidence, § 730, p. 1048, as follows :

‘' Generally, a map . . . must be accurate in order to warrant its admission, that is…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Ark. State Highway Comm. v. WatkinsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1958
  2. Louisiana Ry. & Nav. Co. v. Baton Rouge BrickyardSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1915
  3. Ark. State Highway Commission v. ParksSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1966
  4. Ark. La. Gas Co. v. LawrenceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1965

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

Powered by the Exa API