Tindall v. Murphy

23 F. Cas. 1291
Supreme Court of Arkansas·Decided December 15, 1823·Published

Opinion

OPINION OP

THE COURT.

The only

question presented by the record is, whether the execution offered in evidence by the appellant was properly excluded. We are of opinion that it was incompetent evidence. To have authorized its introduction, the judgment upon which it issued should also have been produced. 3 Litt. 14; 1 Salk. 409 ; 2 Johns. 281; 12 Johns. 213; 2 South. [5 N. J. Law] 813; 20 Johns. 338; 5 Serg. & R. 332; 1 A. K. Marsh, 158; 1 B. Mon. 94; 1 Gilman, 136. Affirmed.

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

Tindall v. Murphy, 23 F. Cas. 1291 (Ark. 1823).

23 F. Cas. 1291 (Tindall v. Murphy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wilson v. Conine
2 Johns. 280 (New York Supreme Court, 1807)
Jackson ex dem. Sleight v. Hasbrouck
12 Johns. 213 (New York Supreme Court, 1815)
Bowen v. Bell
20 Johns. 338 (New York Supreme Court, 1823)
Robinson v. Miller
40 Ky. 88 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1840)
Sharp v. Wickliffe
13 Ky. 10 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1823)