Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

5 Ark. 400

Hamilton v. Buxton

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided January 15, 1844

Supreme Court of Arkansas · decided 1844-01-15

This was assumpsit by attachment, in the Conway Circuit Court, before the Hon. R. C. S. Brown, one of the circuit judges., There was but one count, which was indebitatus assumpsit, for goods sold. Buxton, the defendant, appeared and demurred to the declaration; to which there was a joinder.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1844-01-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently April 1972

3 state decisions

1018441850186018701880189019001910192019301940195019601970decided

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 →

¶1By. the Court,

Ringo, C. J.

¶2Both parties have regularly appeared in this court, pleaded to' issue, and submitted the case to the court for adjudication. Their consent, however, whether express or implied, cannot, according to the familiar and well established principles of law, applicable to such case, invest the court with jurisdiction to take cognizance of the case, until it has been finally adjudicated, and determined by the circuit court. The proceedings in this cáse, as shown by the transcript of the record before us, as to the question whether any final judgment has been given in the cause, are in every essential particular, like those in the case of Campbell et al. vs. Sneed, decided at the present term, and do not, according to the principles there held, show a final judgment in, or decision of, the cause. The record therefore, does not show a case in which the appeal could be taken, or of which this court possesses appellate jurisdiction.

¶3Appeal dismissed.

/5/ark/400 · .json · Public domain