Legal Opinion

Wilson v. Nugent

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided October 17, 1927PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Hart, C. J.,

(after stating the facts). It is earnestly insisted that the chancery, court erred in holding the written instrument of November 8,1924,'signed by Albert L. Wilson, to be a contract instead of a receipt merely. The same instrument may be a receipt and a contract. Where a writing, though in form of a receipt, embodies the elements of a contract, it is in its nature subject to the same rules as any other contract and is not open to variation or contradiction by parol evidence. 22 C. J. 1138 and cases cited; Seitz v. Brewers’ Refrigerating Machine Co., 141 U. S. 510, 12 S. Ct. 46, 35…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Seitz v. Brewers' Refrigerating MacHine Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891
  2. Welch v. WelchSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1918
  3. Friar v. BaldridgeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
  4. Waller v. DansbySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1920
  5. Jordan v. Bank of MorriltonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1925

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Farmers Cooperative Ass'n v. GarrisonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1970
  2. Dunlop Tire and Rubber Corporation v. Fred Thompson, D/B/A Etc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1959
  3. Jeter v. WindleSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1959
  4. Hood v. YoungSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1928
  5. Williams v. HulseSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1931

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API