Turner v. Rosewarren

440 S.W.2d 769, 246 Ark. 1301, 1969 Ark. LEXIS 1378
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Turner v. Rosewarren. Read the opinion of the Court — 250 Ark. 119
Supreme Court of Arkansas·Decided June 9, 1969·No. 5-4883·Published

Opinion

Carleton Harris, Chief Justice.

We find no merit in the petition for rehearing on the main case, but, in line with our decisions in St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company v. Clemons, 242 Ark. 708, 415 S.W. 2d 332, and Hayes Brothers Flooring Company v. Carter, Admx., 240 Ark. 522, 401 S.W. 2d 6, the cause is remanded for another trial, rather than dismissed. In Hayes v. Carter, supra, we said:

“Appellant asks that we reverse and dismiss, blit, after due consideration, we think it is possible that the case has not been fully developed. In fact, our ordinary procedure in reversing judgments in law cases is to remand for another trial, rather than dismiss the cause of action. It is only where it clearly apjjiears that there can be no recovery that we consider it proper to dismiss the cause. Pennington v. Underwood, 56 Ark. 53, 19 S.W. 108, and Arkansas Natural Gas Company v. Gallagher, 111 Ark. 247, 163 S.W. 791.”

It might be added that, in remanding this cause, we have given no consideration whatsoever to the so-called “petition for new trial.”

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

Turner v. Rosewarren, 440 S.W.2d 769, 246 Ark. 1301, 1969 Ark. LEXIS 1378 (Ark. 1969).

440 S.W.2d 769 (Turner v. Rosewarren) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. Clemons
415 S.W.2d 332 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1967)
Pennington v. Underwood
19 S.W. 108 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1892)
Arkansas Natural Gas Co. v. Gallagher
163 S.W. 791 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1914)
Hayes Bros. Flooring Co. v. Carter
401 S.W.2d 6 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1966)