ARK.] TURNER V. ROSEWARLIEN 1301 DAVID TURNER V. -WILLIAM 0. ROSEWARREN, ET AL 5-4883 440 S.W. 2d 769 Supplemental Opinion on Rehearing Delivered June 9, 1969 [Original opinion delivered May 5, 1969, p. 798.] Appeal & Error—Reversal--Necessity of New Trial.—Ordinarily, procedure in reversing judgments in law cases is to remand for another trial for it is only where it clearly appears there can be no recovery that it is considered proper to dismiss the cause. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Johnson County ; Russell C. Roberts, Judge ; petition for rehearing, granted in part. CARLETON HA:llms, Chief Justice. We find no merit in the petition for rehearing on the main case, but, in line with our decisions in St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company v. Clemons, 242 Ark. 708, 415 S.W. 2d 332,
1302 TtilINEI■ V. BOSEWAIWEN [246 and Hayes Brothers Flooring Company v. Carter, Admx., 240 Ark. 522, 401 S.W. 2d 6, the cause is remanded- for another trial, rather than dismissed. In Hayes v. Car-ter, supra, we said: "Appellant asks that we reverse and dismiss, but, after due consideration, we think it is possible that the case bas not been fully developed. In fact, our ordinary procedure in reversing judgments in law eases is to remand for another trial, rather than dismiss the cause of action. It is only where it clearly appears that there can be no recovery that we consider it proper to dismiss the cause. Pen-nington v. Underwood, 56 Ark. 53, 19 S.W. 108, and Arkansas Natural Gas Company v. Gallagher, 111 Ark. 247, 163 S.W. 791." It might be added that, 'in remanding this cause, we have given no consideration whatsoever to the so-called "petition for new trial."
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.