Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

203 Ark. 858

158 S.W.2d 926

Chambers v. Gray

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided February 23, 1942

Supreme Court of Arkansas · decided 1942-02-23

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““Such is not the purpose and effect of that act. The collision occurred in Oklahoma, and act 314 does not relate to or cover it. Such is the-holding in the cases of Viking Freight Co. v. Keck, [202] Ark. [656], 153 S.W.2d 163, 167 , and Missouri Pacific R. Co. v. Kincan-non, 203 Ark. 76 , 156 S.W.2d 70 , 71-In the last cited case we reaffirmed the holding of the former, and, in so-doing, said: ‘We there said, as we now say, that “It [Act 314] localizes causes of action originating in this State, and has no application to causes of action arising in some other State.” ’ “Appellant has a transitory cause of action, unaffected by act 314, upon which she may sue in any jurisdiction where service may be had. She may sue in the Yell circuit court, if service upon appellee is had in-that county, but she cannot maintain the suit in that county upon service-had in another county. Sec. 1398* Pope’s Digest. “The case was properly dismissed* and that judgment is affirmed.””

quoted by 1 later decision, including 176 F. Supp. 346 - Deason v. Groendyke Transport, Inc.

Relies on Missouri Pac. R.R. Co., Thompson v. Kincannon · Viking Freight Co., Inc. v. Keck, Judge

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1942-02-23

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently December 1975

18 state decisions

1201942195019601970decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Smith, J.

¶1 Appellant filed this suit against appellee in the Danville district of Yell county to recover damages to compensate an injury resulting from an automobile collision which occurred in the State of Oklahoma. Appellant is a resident of the Danville district of Yell county, and appellee is a resident of Pulaski county, in which latter county service of summons upon him was had.

¶2 Appellee appeared specially for the purpose of moving to dismiss the case, upon the ground that the Yell circuit court was without jurisdiction. That motion was sustained, and the complaint was dismissed, from which judgment is this appeal.

¶3 Reversal is asked upon the ground that act 314 of the acts of 1939 conferred jurisdiction of the action in the county of appellant’s.residence.

¶4 Such is not the purpose and effect of that act. The collision occurred in Oklahoma, and act 314 does not relate to or cover it. Such is the holding in the cases of Viking Freight Co. v. Keck, Judge, 202 Ark. 656, 153 S. W. 2d 167, and Missouri Pacific Rd. Co. v. Kincannon, Judge, ante, p. 76, 156 S. W. 2d 70. In the last cited case we reaffirmed the holding of the former, and, in so doing, said: “We there said, as we now say, that £It [Act 314] localizes causes of action originating in this state, and has no application to causes of action originating in some other state.”

¶5 Appellant has a transitory cause of action, unaffected by act 314, upon which she may sue in any jurisdiction where service may be had. She may sue in the Yell circuit court, if service upon appellee is had in that county, hut she cannot maintain the suit in that county upon service had in another county. Section 1398, Pope’s Digest.

¶6 The case was properly dismissed, and that judgment is affirmed.

/203/ark/858 · .json · Public domain