{
  "id": 1705673,
  "name": "Griffin v. Mo. Pac. Rd. Co.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Griffin v. Mo. Pac. Rd.",
  "decision_date": "1957-02-04",
  "docket_number": "5-1168",
  "first_page": "312",
  "last_page": "313",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "227 Ark. 312"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "298 S.W.2d 55"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "226 Ark. 797",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        8725095
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/226/0797-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 150,
    "char_count": 1545,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.502,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.4145435417730946e-07,
      "percentile": 0.8003204047803559
    },
    "sha256": "52afdbf47ab4b09f23b2aaa6555006a55b5b1914f6e4d66f14a4289eebc157e5",
    "simhash": "1:0fef0d172497bf29",
    "word_count": 262
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:33:25.767944+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Griffin v. Mo. Pac. Rd. Co."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Sam Robinson, Associate Justice.\nIn this appeal, the appellant states his points as follows: \u201c1. This appeal is taken by appellant for tbe sole purpose of determining whether or not the trial court had the right to arbitrarily take from the appellant\u2019s attorney the right to qualify the Jury on voir dire examination; the right to examine the jury as to disqualification; challenge for cause and peremptory challenge and to examine them individually or in groups of three. 2. To determine \u25a0whether the trial court erred in not allowing appellant\u2019s attorney the privilege of reading before the jury and into the record that part of his complaint touching upon \u2018The Federal Employers\u2019 Liability Act\u2019 and the \u2018Safety Appliance Acts.\u2019 3. To determine if the trial court had the right and power to permit the appellant\u2019s wife to testify in behalf of the appellee to impeach or discredit her husband\u2019s testimony.\u201d\nThere is no abstract of the voir dire examination, and no abstract of the testimony or of the opening statement. Hence, from appellant\u2019s brief, we cannot determine whether there was error. It has been pointed out repeatedly that this court will not search the record; that it is wholly impractical for the seven members of this court to read the one record. Commissioner of Labor C. R. Thornbrough v. Danco Construction Company, 226 Ark. 797, 294 S. W. 2d 336.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Sam Robinson, Associate Justice."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "M. V. Moody, for appellant.",
      "Pat Mehaffy and W. A. Eldredge, Jr., for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Griffin v. Mo. Pac. Rd. Co.\n5-1168\n298 S. W. 2d 55\nOpinion delivered February 4, 1957.\nM. V. Moody, for appellant.\nPat Mehaffy and W. A. Eldredge, Jr., for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0312-01",
  "first_page_order": 336,
  "last_page_order": 337
}