{
  "id": 1524342,
  "name": "Nashville Lumber Company v. Corbell",
  "name_abbreviation": "Nashville Lumber Co. v. Corbell",
  "decision_date": "1907-12-16",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "596",
  "last_page": "597",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "84 Ark. 596"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 113,
    "char_count": 1391,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.632,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 8.41186757842258e-08,
      "percentile": 0.4828779592941519
    },
    "sha256": "0cf5cd8761812a42e40dccd92dd58c845e743a5b8e4b0cd3e4a0820035426bad",
    "simhash": "1:d290bcf50a962b62",
    "word_count": 226
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:07:28.525494+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Nashville Lumber Company v. Corbell."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PER Curiam.\nThis is a motion for an injunction pending appeal. The chancery court refused to enjoin Cor.bell and wife from preventing the lumber company from laying-a tramway across their homestead, on the ground that the conveyance under which the lumber company claimed was void because the wife had not joined therein, and dissolved a temporary injunction which had been granted.\nInjunctions and writs of supersedeas are issued by this court to preserve the status quo pending an appeal, where the justice of the case requires it, but not for the purpose of creating a temporary right. This case is the converse of Union Sawmill Co. v. Felsenthal Land & Townsite Company, ante p. 494. For the reasons there given, this application is denied.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PER Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "/. W. Bishop, for appellant.",
      "Sain & Sain and W. P. Peazel, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Nashville Lumber Company v. Corbell.\nOpinion delivered December 16, 1907.\nAppeal \u2014 practice as to injunction and supersedeas. \u2014 While temporary injunctions and writs of supersedeas may be issued from the Supreme Court to preserve the status quo pending an appeal, where the justice of the case requires it, they will not be used for the purpose of creating a temporary right, as to enjoin the owner of laud from preventing a lumber company -from laying a tramway across his land.\nAppeal from Howard Chancery Court; James D. Shaver, Chancellor;\ntemporary injunction denied.\n/. W. Bishop, for appellant.\nSain & Sain and W. P. Peazel, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0596-01",
  "first_page_order": 618,
  "last_page_order": 619
}