{
  "id": 8726331,
  "name": "Merrell v. Smith, Special Admr.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Merrell v. Smith",
  "decision_date": "1956-11-26",
  "docket_number": "5-1007",
  "first_page": "1016",
  "last_page": "1016",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "226 Ark. 1016"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "295 S.W.2d 624"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "69 A. L. R. 88",
      "category": "reporters:specialty",
      "reporter": "A.L.R.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "166 S. W. 547",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.W.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "112 Ark. 483",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1538841
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/112/0483-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 136,
    "char_count": 1201,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.563,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 3.9355308941367147e-07,
      "percentile": 0.9032034300069232
    },
    "sha256": "82c1544676c04a6b3c721db51bb82560bd98a9410358fb7f87364f6805558d8d",
    "simhash": "1:637cc115328599d1",
    "word_count": 202
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T14:58:54.393419+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Merrell v. Smith, Special Admr."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "J. SeaborN Holt, Associate Justice.\nAppellants bring this appeal from a decree, upholding and admitting to probate, the will of Maymie E. Whitmore who died testate August 31, 1954. Appellants contested the will on several grounds, one, \u2014 and the only one now considered, \u2014 being that the testatrix had made an oral agreement with appellants to leave her property to them. At the trial in Probate Court appellants sought specific performance of this alleged agreement. This appellants could not do in a court of Probate, their remedy for specific performance is in a court of equity. \u2018 \u2018 The Probate Court has no jurisdiction to grant equitable relief,\u201d Carter v. Younger, 112 Ark. 483, 166 S. W. 547. See also 57 Am. Jur. 158, \u00a7 180; Annot., 69 A. L. R. 88. While it properly admitted the will to probate, the Probate Court lacked jurisdiction to decide the issue of specific performance of the alleged oral contract. The case must be and is remanded with directions that it be transferred to equity for further proceedings.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "J. SeaborN Holt, Associate Justice."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "J. G. Sain, Tom Kidd, for appellant.",
      "Shaver, Tackett, J ones & Lowe, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Merrell v. Smith, Special Admr.\n5-1007\n295 S. W. 2d 624\nOpinion delivered November 26, 1956.\nJ. G. Sain, Tom Kidd, for appellant.\nShaver, Tackett, J ones & Lowe, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "1016-01",
  "first_page_order": 1040,
  "last_page_order": 1040
}