Bagley v. Rowland

Decided November 15, 1884

Supreme Court of Arkansas · decided 1884-11-15

T. C. Peek, Circuit Judge. 1. The judgment is void for uncertainty. 2. The court erred in sustaining a general demurrer to the bill. 3. The court erred in deciding the cause res judicata. 1. Courts of equity do not reform married women’s deeds. 89 Ark., 180; 1 Bish. on Married Women, sec. 599; 88 Ark., 1¡A0. 2. The matter was res judicata. 38 Ark., j57; 10 lb., 186; 13 lb., 103; lj lb., 30j; 11 lb., 151; 88 lb., 176; 81¡. Minn., j.; Jj9 Texas, 81¡B.

Decided 1884-11-15

Eakin, J.

¶1This suit was begun in the Saline Circuit Court in chancery, after the decree there in the case of Bagley v. Fletcher, which has just been decided here. Reference is made to that case for the facts. It concerns the same land and substantially renews the same litigation. The object is to obtain a reformation of Mrs. Rowland’s acknowledgment, but if that were done, it would not have bettered the complainant’s case which had been decided adversely to him on other grounds. The m,atter in the court below was res judicata, and his right to the land was the matter involved in the appeal of the other case. This bill was properly dismissed.

¶2Affirm.