58 Ark. 390 | Ark. | 1894
There being no objection to the instructions of the court, the first ground, of motion for new trial is probably intended as formal merely.
The same of course is to be said of the third ground, in part.
The motion for new trial on the eighth ground was properly overruled, as no predicate was laid upon which to impeach the testimony of Brewer by the testimony of Lankford, which the court refused to admit for this purpose.
We deem it unnecessary, and even improper, to discuss the twelfth ground of the motion for new trial.
Por the error mentioned, the judgment of the court is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings.