{ "id": 1519094, "name": "Brown v. Frenken", "name_abbreviation": "Brown v. Frenken", "decision_date": "1908-07-13", "docket_number": "", "first_page": "160", "last_page": "162", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "87 Ark. 160" } ], "court": { "name_abbreviation": "Ark.", "id": 8808, "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court" }, "jurisdiction": { "id": 34, "name_long": "Arkansas", "name": "Ark." }, "cites_to": [ { "cite": "47 Ark. 412", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ark.", "pin_cites": [ { "page": "413" } ], "opinion_index": -1 }, { "cite": "28 Ark. 479", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ark.", "opinion_index": -1 }, { "cite": "97 Ill. 568", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Ill.", "case_ids": [ 2843053 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/ill/97/0568-01" ] }, { "cite": "27 Wis. 667", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Wis.", "case_ids": [ 11285919 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/wis/27/0667-01" ] }, { "cite": "8 Cal. 306", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Cal.", "case_ids": [ 2257420 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/cal/8/0306-01" ] }, { "cite": "6 Met. 197", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "Met.", "opinion_index": 0 } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 276, "char_count": 4025, "ocr_confidence": 0.668, "pagerank": { "raw": 1.366928120790443e-07, "percentile": 0.6374580139614318 }, "sha256": "439d0b1988c643c187774a6031b5b3f70285428009d9b868b75a9134be97a158", "simhash": "1:9b219ffdfd28e1ad", "word_count": 702 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T20:24:32.952897+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [], "parties": [ "Brown v. Frenken." ], "opinions": [ { "text": "Hart, J.\nOn June 6, 1906, Nick Frenken instituted a replevin suit against the Harden-Dunham Dumber Company before John F. James, a justice of the peace in Randolph County, Arkansas, to recover the possession of one circular saw, and one rip saw. The case was continued from time to time until September 6, 1906, when judgment by default was rendered in favor of the plaintiff.\nOn the 24th day of September, 1906, the following affidavit for appeal was filed in the cause: (Caption omitted.) \u201cComes now Ben A. Brown, who states to the court that he is the regularly qualified and appointed trustee in bankruptcy of the estate of George W. Harden and A. M. Dunham, partners as HardenDunham Dumber Company, which said firm was adjudged to be bankrupt in the United States Court for the Northern Division of the Eastern District of the State of Arkansas; that he has filed his bond as such trustee aforesaid, and is now acting in such capacity. Fie states that as such trustee he has succeeded to all the rights, privileges and equities of the said firm in this suit, and that he believes that he, as trustee, has a meritorious defense to this suit. He therefore prays that he, as such trustee, be permitted an appeal in this case to the circuit court of Randolph County, Arkansas, and states that such appeal is taken, not for the purpose of vexation or delay, but that justice may be done.\n[Signed] \u201cBen A. Brown, trustee in bankruptcy of estate of Harden-Dunham Dumber Company.\n\u201cSubscribed and sworn to before me on this the 24th day of September, 1906.\n\u201cJohn F. James, J. P.\u201d\nIndorsed: \u2014 \u201cFiled, examined, found regular and appeal granted on this 24th day of September, 1906.\n\u201cJohn F. James, J. P.\u201d\nTranscript was properly made and filed in office of the clerk of the circuit court October 24, 1906. At the July term, 1907, of the circuit court, appellee moved to dismiss the appeal because said Ben A. Brown was not a party to the suit at the time the judgment was rendered by the justice of the peace.' Thereupon the court dismissed the appeal. To which appellant saved exceptions and prayed an appeal.\n.Section 4665 of Kirby\u2019s Digest provides that any person aggrieved by any judgment rendered by a justice of the peace may take his appeal therefrom to the circuit court. \u201cA party aggrieved is one whose pecuniary interest is directly affected by the decree or one whose right of property may be established or divested by the decree.\u201d Wiggin v. Sweet, 6 Met. 197. The party aggrieved is the person who would have had the property if the judgment alleged'to be erroneous had not been rendered. Adams v. Woods, 8 Cal. 306; Veasie Bank v. Young, 53 Maine, 560; Betts v. Shotton, 27 Wis. 667; Case of Koch's Estate, 4 Rawle (Pa.), 267; Jenkins v. International Bank, 97 Ill. 568.\nThe trustee in bankruptcy is not a stranger, but holds the title to the bankrupt\u2019s property in trust for those beneficially entitled to it. It is clearly established by the authorities supra that a party aggrieved by a judgment has a right of appeal, though he is not a party to the record. If denied the benefit of an appeal by their trustee, the persons beneficially interested in\u2019 the estate of the bankrupt would be concluded by a judgment from which they had no opportunity to appeal.\nReversed and remanded.", "type": "majority", "author": "Hart, J." } ], "attorneys": [ "Henderson & Campbell, for appellant.", "Appellee pro se." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "Brown v. Frenken.\nOpinion delivered July 13, 1908.\nAppear erom justice oe the peace \u2014 party aggrieved \u2014 trustee in bankruptcy. \u2014 Under Kirby\u2019s Digest, \u00a7 466s, providing that any person aggrieved by any judgment rendered by a justice of the peace may take his appeal therefrom to the circuit court, held that a trustee in bankruptcy may appeal from a judgment against the bankrupt.\nAppeal from Randolph Circuit Court; /. W. Meeks, Judge;\nreversed.\nHenderson & Campbell, for appellant.\nThe trastee in bankruptcy had the right to appeal. Kirby\u2019s Digest, \u00a7 4666; 2 Cyc. 641.\nAppellee pro se.\nThere is no sufficient showing by the trustee of a right of appeal to the circuit court. Kirby\u2019s Digest, \u00a7 4665; 28 Ark. 479; 47 Ark. 412, 413." }, "file_name": "0160-01", "first_page_order": 182, "last_page_order": 184 }