Widmer v. Modern Ford Tractor Sales, 5--4512
| Decision Date | 22 April 1968 |
| Docket Number | No. 5--4512,5--4512 |
| Citation | 244 Ark. 696,426 S.W.2d 806 |
| Parties | Carl WIDMER, Appellant, v. MODERN FORD TRACTOR SALES, a Corporation, and W. A. 'Jake' Davis, Appellees. |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
The judgment is affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
4 cases
-
Ellingburg v. State
...There appears in the record a letter from appellant waiving representation of counsel on appeal. As stated in Widmer v. Modern Ford Tractor Sales, 244 Ark. 696, 426 S.W.2d 806, 'We recognize a litigant's right to attempt his own representation in the courts of this state under our code of p......
-
Miskimins v. City Nat. Bank of Fort Smith
...instance, upon the party moving for summary judgment. Evers v. Guaranty Investment Co., 244 Ark. 925, 428 S.W.2d 68; Widmer v. Ford Tractor Co., 244 Ark. 696, 426 S.W.2d 806; United Press International, Inc. v. Heinreich, 241 Ark. 36, 406 S.W.2d 317. Doubts must be resolved against the moti......
-
Widmer v. Fort Smith Vehicle & Machinery Corp.
...the allegations of his complaint in a civil case.' 626, 427 S.W.2d 186 (April 15, 1968), we said: In Widmer v. Modern Ford Tractor Sales, 244 Ark. 696, 426 S.W.2d 806 (April 22, 1968), we held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in quashing appellant's interrogatories, and we ......
-
Arnold v. All Am. Assur. Co.
...there is any substantial evidence on which a contrary result could be reached, the judgment should be denied. Widmer v. Modern Ford Tractor Sales, 244 Ark. 696, 426 S.W.2d 806; Wirges v. Hawkins, 238 Ark. 100, 378 S.W.2d 646; Reddell v. Missouri Pacific Railroad Company, 238 Ark. 753, 384 S......