Court Opinion

ID: 9664702
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 00:26:07.583432+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:15:08.674211
License: Public Domain

Grieein Smith, Chief Justice, dissenting. This appeal was submitted February 26th. Mr. Justice Robinson announced that he would not participate in the determination. Result was that three of the Judges thought the judgment should be reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial, while three believed that the instruction complained of was distinguishable factually from cases controlling where binding directions had been given. The effect of a binding instruction was discussed in Missouri Pacific Railroad Co. v. Burks, 196 Ark. 1104, 121 S. W. 2d 65. I concede that Hearn v. East Texas is a closer case, but feel that any relaxation of the rule applicable to binding instructions should he preceded hy notice to courts and attorneys. Anheuser-Busch, Inc., v. Manion, 193 Ark. 405, 100 S. W. 2d 672. I therefore dissent. MoFaddin, J. concurs in this dissent.