
    Case No. 2,817a.
    CLARK et al. v. CROPPER.
    [Hempst. 213.]
    
    Superior Court, D. Arkansas.
    July, 1833.
    Action bt Assignee of Note—Phoof of Assignment.
    1. The assignment of a note must be proved on the trial to entitle the assignee to judgment.
    2. Th° case of Stroud v. Harrington [Case No. 13,540a] cited and approved.
    In error to Hempstead circuit court.
    [At law. Action by Levi Cropper against John Clark and Allen M. Oakley on a promissory note. There was a judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error.]
    Before ESKRIDGE and CLAYTON, Judges.
    
      
       [Reported by Samuel H, Hempstead, Esq.]
    
   OPINION OF THE COURT.

There is an error in the judgment of the circuit court in rendering judgment against the defendant without the production of any evidence to prove the assignment of the note on which the action was brought. The case of Stroud v. Harrington, decided at the January term, 1831 [Case No. 13,540a], is in point, and contains the reasons upon which this opinion is based. The time at which the assignment was filed up at the trial, we do not regard as erroneous. Judgment reversed.  