{
  "id": 236580,
  "name": "Thompson and Mathews vs. Campbell",
  "name_abbreviation": "Thompson v. Campbell",
  "decision_date": "1821-06",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "8",
  "last_page": "9",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "1 Ark. Terr. Rep. 8"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark. Super. Ct.",
    "id": 9132,
    "name": "Superior Court of the Territory of Arkansas"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "12 Mass. 49",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Mass.",
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "2 Wend. 295",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Wend.",
      "case_ids": [
        3514315
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/wend/2/0295-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "4 Watts, 308",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Watts",
      "case_ids": [
        1842687
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/watts/4/0308-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "3 McCord, 559",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "McCord",
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "7 Ala. 525",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ala.",
      "case_ids": [
        8496637
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ala/7/0525-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "8 Mis. 681",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Miss.",
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "5 Ark. 74",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "weight": 2,
      "opinion_index": -1
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 200,
    "char_count": 1978,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.493,
    "sha256": "96bfdd8315680e819b78a4bc1fd30ff7f4b8c50d4a13d4e2ad7f75e0ea7f2fa3",
    "simhash": "1:7de0eff9e9070705",
    "word_count": 363
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:05:42.619619+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Thompson and Mathews vs. Campbell."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Opinion op the Court.\u2014 It is clear that the court erred in rejecting the evidence offered by the plaintiff as stated in the bill of exceptions, and also in ordering the plaintiff to be non-suited against his consent.\nThe evidence was clearly admissible to support the cause of action as laid in the declaration, and should have been received.\nReversed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": null
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Thompson and Mathews vs. Campbell.\n1. It is erroneous to order a plaintiff to be nonsuited against his consent. 1 Peters, 471, 497 ; 6 Peters, 609.\n2. When nonsuit may be taken.\nJune, 1821.\n\u2014 Appeal from Lawrence Circuit Court, determined before Benjamin Johnson and Andrew Scott, judges.\nA plaintiff cannot be nonsuited against his consent, because he has a right by law to have his case submitted to a jury and the court. He may agree to a nonsuit; but if he does not choose so to do, the court cannot compel him to submit to it. Elmore v. Grymes, 1 Peters, S. C. R. 471; D\u2019Wolf v. Rabaud, 1 Peters, 497; Crane v. Morris, 6 Peters, 609 ; Mitchell v. New England Mar. Ins. Co. 6 Pickering, 118; Bove v. Davis, 5 Blackford, 115; Marlin v. Webb, 5 Ark. 74; Wells v. Gaty, 8 Mis. 681; Hunt v. Stewart, 7 Ala. 525 ; Scruggs v. Brackin, 4 Yerger, 528.\nA plaintiff' may take a nonsuit at any time before the court or jury have actually rendered a verdict. Dove v. Hawks, 3 McCord, 559 ; M'Lughan v. Bovard, 4 Watts, 308; Wooster v. Burr, 2 Wend. 295 ; Haskell v. Whitney, 12 Mass. 49, note.\nIn Arkansas it is provided by statute, that \u201c no plaintiff shall be permitted to suffer a nonsuit on trial after the jury have retired from the bar-, or the cause has been submitted to the court.\u201d Digest, \u00a7 111, p. 813.\nA nonsuit cannot be ordered by the court without the acquiescence of the plaintiff. The correct practice is to instruct the jury, that if the evidence has not proven a matter necessary to be proven, the jury must find for the defendant. Martin v. Webb, 5 Ark. 74; Ringo v. Field, 1 Eng. 49 ; Carr v. Crain, 2 Eng. 249."
  },
  "file_name": "0008-01",
  "first_page_order": 24,
  "last_page_order": 25
}