Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

53 Ark. 21

Siloam Springs v. McPhitridge

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided March 8, 1890

Supreme Court of Arkansas · decided 1890-03-08

<p>APPEAL from Benton Circuit Court.</p> <p>J, M. Pittman, Judge,</p> <p>E. S. McDaniel for appellant.</p>

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““Its judgment upon the verdict convicting McPhitridge became final'at the end of the fall term, and the pendency of the motion for new trial and in arrest and the order suspending execution of the judgment did' not- prevent this result. Had the court desired to reserve the matter of the motion for consideration, it should have set aside the judgment at the fall term.””

quoted by 1 later decision, including Leforce v. Haymes

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1890-03-08

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently January 1972

1 district · 12 state decisions

30189019001910192019301940195019601970decided

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 →

Per Curiam.

¶1On August 17, 1887, the defendant, Wm. G. McPhitridge, was tried before the mayor of the town of Siloam Springs for violation of a town ordinance. He was convicted, fined and appealed to the circuit court. On September 27, 1887, hevyas tried and convicted in the circuit court, and judgment rendered against him for the fine and costs.

¶2On October 17, 1887, at the same term of the court, he filed his motion for a new trial and in arrest of judgment, and the record says, “which motion is by the court taken under advisement, and hearing of said motion is continued. And it is ordered by the court that the execution of the judgment rendered in this cause be suspended until decision by the court upon said motion.”

¶3At the next term of the court, on April 20, 1888, the court sustained said motion in arrest of judgment, set aside the judgment entered at the preceding term, and gave judgment against appellant for the whole cost of the prosecution.'

¶4This was beyond the power of the court. Its judgment upon the verdict convicting McPhitridge became final at the end of the fall term, and the pendency of the motion for new trial and in arrest and the order suspending execution of the judgment did not prevent this result. Had the court desired to reserve the matter of the motion for consideration, it should have set aside the judgment at the fall term. The-judgment of September 27, 1887, is still in full force, and the order setting it aside is quashed as upon certiorari.

/53/ark/21 · .json · Public domain