260 CASES IN THE SUPREME COURT Jones vs. Johnson. [DECEMBER JONES VS. JOHNSON. An informal and defective declaration combining several forms of action, should be met by demurrer, not by plea to the writ Error to Carroll Circuit Court. GARLAND, WarrE & NASH, for plaintiff in error. Mr. Justice ComFroN delivered the opinion of the court. The plaintiff below filed his declaration against Johnson, and a writ of replevin was issued thereon, and served upon the defendant. At the return term, the defendant appeared and pleaded in abatement, that the wfit was issued without any declaration in replevin having been filed. On issue joined, the finding was for
OF THE STATE OF ARKANSAS. 261 TERM, 1866.] the defendant, and the writ quashed. This was error. Tbere was a.declaration, and the finding on the issue should, therefore, have been for the plaintiff. If the declaration was defective, it should have been met by demurrer, and not by plea to the writ, as for want of a declaration. Sillivant & Thorn vs. Reardon, 5 Ark., 140 ; State vs. _Mississippi, Ouachita & Red River R. R. Co., 20 Ark., 495. The form of action is . misstated in the commencement of the declaration, but we think it sufficiently appears, from the body of the declaration, that replevin in the detinet was the form of action intended,"notwithstanding the declaration alleges a finding of the property, as in trover, instead of a bailment as in rqlevin. The declaration is certainly informal, and is perhaps, defective in substance : but its legal sufficiency is not a question now before us. Let the judgment be reversed and the cause rtimanded, with leave to the plaintiff to amend his declaration should he choose to do so.
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.