Stuckey v. Lindley

Decided December 16, 1907

Supreme Court of Arkansas · decided 1907-12-16

Fulkerson, Judge; statement by the court. Appellee instituted this action before a justice of the peace by filing his affidavit that Charles Hunter was indebted to him in the sum of $67.70 for some walnut logs sold by appellee to Hunter, and that the purchase money therefor was due and unpaid, and a-slcing judgment for said sum, and that it be declared a lien on the said logs, and at the same time gave a bond to procure the issuance of the order .of seizure.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently October 1920

2 state decisions

Relies on Kelly v. Keith · Thompson v. Baxter

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

affirmed · Decided 1907-12-16

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Hart, J.,

¶1(after stating the facts.) Appellant does not question the correctness of the amount of the judgment, but claims that the court erred in declaring a lien on the walnut logs attached. This only affects the intervener,' and his rights ■ are not before the court.

¶2Appellant does not claim any interest in the logs, and was not prejudiced by the declaration of law, if erroneous. Kelly v. Keith, 77 Ark. 31.

¶3He could only be affected by the trivial amount of costs that accrued by reason of the attachment, and that could have been reached by motion to retax the costs, instead of by appeal. Thompson v. Baxter, 76 Ark. 327.

¶4Affirmed.