{
  "id": 6137618,
  "name": "WHOLESALE OIL COMPANY v. T. B. & L. FARM SUPPLY, INC.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Wholesale Oil Co. v. T. B. & L. Farm Supply, Inc.",
  "decision_date": "1982-02-17",
  "docket_number": "CA 81-218",
  "first_page": "83",
  "last_page": "84",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "4 Ark. App. 83"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "628 S.W.2d 22"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark. Ct. App.",
    "id": 13370,
    "name": "Arkansas Court of Appeals"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "275 Ark. 61",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1753647
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1982,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/275/0061-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "257 Ark. 882",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        8724461
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1975,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/257/0882-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 135,
    "char_count": 1181,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.849,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.17487004068576972
    },
    "sha256": "0d4b6df63826f936b088a37edce370947147cdd17d1200149901a52158df2f92",
    "simhash": "1:13ba8e71602345ce",
    "word_count": 211
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:42:09.143623+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "WHOLESALE OIL COMPANY v. T. B. & L. FARM SUPPLY, INC."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Melvin Mayfield, Chief Judge.\nSeven years ago in DeSoto, Inc. v. Crow, 257 Ark. 882, 520 S.W. 2d 307 (1975), the Arkansas Supreme Court set aside a judgment entered against a garnishee on its failure to answer a writ of garnishment. The court said the writ merely advised the garnishee to appear and answer questions propounded and to be propounded but did not contain language sufficient to give notice that the failure to answer could result in a judgment against the garnishee.\nToday we are asked to require a trial court to enter judgment against a garnishee who was served with a writ containing the same defect which existed in the writ in the DeSoto case.\nThe request must be denied. Even if we were inclined to grant it, the Supreme Court \u2014 only a few days ago \u2014 clearly indicated that it would not retreat from its holding in DeSoto. See Tucker v. Johnson, 275 Ark. 61, 628 S.W. 2d 281 (1982).\nThe order of the trial court is affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Melvin Mayfield, Chief Judge."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "W. B. Guthrie, Jr., Ltd., by: Robert M. Abney, for appellant.",
      "Joe N. Peacock, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "WHOLESALE OIL COMPANY v. T. B. & L. FARM SUPPLY, INC.\nCA 81-218\n628 S.W. 2d 22\nCourt of Appeals of Arkansas\nOpinion delivered February 17, 1982\nW. B. Guthrie, Jr., Ltd., by: Robert M. Abney, for appellant.\nJoe N. Peacock, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0083-01",
  "first_page_order": 105,
  "last_page_order": 106
}