Arkansas-Denning Coal Co. v. Yocum

194 S.W. 34, 128 Ark. 291, 1917 Ark. LEXIS 521
CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas
DecidedApril 2, 1917
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 194 S.W. 34 (Arkansas-Denning Coal Co. v. Yocum) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Arkansas-Denning Coal Co. v. Yocum, 194 S.W. 34, 128 Ark. 291, 1917 Ark. LEXIS 521 (Ark. 1917).

Opinion

Wood, J.,

(after stating the facts). The appellants contend that the case should be reversed because of the refusal of the trial judge to give the instructions in writing after being requested to do so by the defendants. The record does not show that any objections were made and exceptions saved to the ruling of the court in refusing the request of appellants to reduce the instructions to writing and in instructing the jury orally.

“Exceptions to the action of the trial court in giving or refusing instructions must be made during the trial and brought into the record by bill of exceptions, and can not be reserved by merely assigning them as grounds of a motion for a new trial.” Cammack v. Southwestern Fire Ins. Co., 88 Ark. 505; Plumlee v. St. L. S. W. Ry. Co., 85 Ark. 488.

The judgment is correct, and it is therefore affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

DeQueen & Eastern Railroad v. Pigue
205 S.W. 888 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1918)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
194 S.W. 34, 128 Ark. 291, 1917 Ark. LEXIS 521, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arkansas-denning-coal-co-v-yocum-ark-1917.