{
  "id": 1652973,
  "name": "Croom v. United Farm Agency",
  "name_abbreviation": "Croom v. United Farm Agency",
  "decision_date": "1953-06-29",
  "docket_number": "5-151",
  "first_page": "366",
  "last_page": "367",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "222 Ark. 366"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "260 S.W.2d 454"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 156,
    "char_count": 1606,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.518,
    "sha256": "916f20719e27307b4d3a1e765aae7e2c2a67bf67e8b89f89aebd5022ff482be9",
    "simhash": "1:5289b14cae2fa2b7",
    "word_count": 284
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:48:42.003901+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Croom v. United Farm Agency."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "George Rose Smith, J.\nThis action for a sales commission resulted in an $1,125 judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant\u2019s only contention on appeal is that he, a resident of the Northern District of Sharp County, cannot be sued in the Southern District upon a transitory cause of action.\nAct 39 of 1893 created two judicial districts in the county, authorized two terms of court annually in each district, and provided that a resident of one district could not be sued in the other. Act 223 of 1929 reduced the terms of circuit court to two a year, one in each district. Act 110 of 1933 fixed new dates for the terms of court, six months apart, and added: \u201cThe jurisdiction of the Court sitting at either of said County seats shall be coextensive with the entire County.\u201d\nWe agree with the trial judge\u2019s interpretation of the statutes. It has long been the practice of the legislature to provide at least two terms of circuit court a year in each county. Yet from 1929 to 1933 the citizens of Sharp County had access to only one regular session of court annually, as the 1893 Act treated the two districts as separate counties in the matter of venue. It was clearly the intention of the 1933 General Assembly to remedy the matter by permitting all residents of the county to be sued in either district. Unless the statute had that effect we do not perceive that the quoted sentence accomplished anything at all.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "George Rose Smith, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Shelby G. Ferguson, for appellant.",
      "Chas. F. Cole, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Croom v. United Farm Agency.\n5-151\n260 S. W. 2d 454\nOpinion delivered June 29, 1953.\nRehearing denied October 5, 1953.\nShelby G. Ferguson, for appellant.\nChas. F. Cole, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0366-01",
  "first_page_order": 390,
  "last_page_order": 391
}