{
  "id": 1868291,
  "name": "Frost vs. Wiggins",
  "name_abbreviation": "Frost v. Wiggins",
  "decision_date": "1860-07",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "403",
  "last_page": "403",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "21 Ark. 403"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "13 Ark. 344",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        8728154
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/13/0344-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "13 Ark. 344",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        8728154
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/13/0344-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 109,
    "char_count": 1190,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.484,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.770845263994211e-08,
      "percentile": 0.41156453522966013
    },
    "sha256": "dc42c6958616f4b99c75208ddb10d6100a80457d31a94f778b3362f8f5d9d121",
    "simhash": "1:bce18483eb86af61",
    "word_count": 207
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:46:32.809826+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Frost vs. Wiggins."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Fairchild\ndelivered the opinion of the court.\nAlthough the plaintiff did not obtain judgment in the court below, to which he was clearly entitled, on the facts proven, as presented in the bill of exceptions, yet The State Bank vs. Conway, 13 Ark. 344, disposes of this, as on the trial before the court, as a jury, no principle of law was asked to be declared as applicable to the case, and no motion was made for a new-trial.\nThe plaintiff simply excepted to the finding and judgment of the court, but the bill of exceptions brings nothing before this court.\nJudgment affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Fairchild"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Johnston & Harrison, for plaintiff.",
      "Garland & Randolph, for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Frost vs. Wiggins.\nWhere no motion for a new trial has been made, nor any question of law reserved at the trial, there is nothing before this court for adjudication.\nIhe rule established in State Bank vs. Conway, 13 Ark. 344 \u2014 which is simple and easily understood and followed \u2014 applies as well to cases submitted to the court, as to a jury, and to cases where there is an agreed statement of facts, as where the facts are proved by witnesses.\nWrit of Error to Ashley Circuit Court.\nHon. Tiieodoric F. Sorrells, Circuit Judge.\nJohnston & Harrison, for plaintiff.\nGarland & Randolph, for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0403-01",
  "first_page_order": 405,
  "last_page_order": 405
}