Pike & Baldwin, for plaintiff.
{"character_count": 418, "word_count": 70, "ccnet_language_score": [0.927299976348877], "ccnet_perplexity": [1120.0], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
No. SO. Mitchell as ad. vs.. Byrd g Dunn.
Appeal from Pulaski circuit court.


Affirmed Opinion by johnson, {. j.


Where the bill Of exceptions does not negative
tho fact this court viii presume that there was
sufficient evidence TO warrant the judgment; and
where the plea Of the statute Of limitations Is over
ruled the inference is that there was subsequent
promise


Field, for appellant
Watkins q Curran, contra,