Legal Opinion

Barker v. Cunningham

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided July 15, 1912PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Appeal from Arkansas Chancery Court; John M. Elliott, Chancellor;

1Opinion of the CourtKirby, J.

This case is controlled by the opinion in Barker v. Feustal, recently decided, 103 Ark. 312. It was brought to disaffirm an infant’s conveyance of real estate and to redeem the land conveyed thereby from tax sale.

Appellant herein was plaintiff in both suits; the same conveyance to the same party is sought to be set aside and the lands redeemed from the same tax sale to the same party, it being alleged in this case that the land had been conveyed by appellant’s grantee to C. Willis and Frank Cunningham, instead of to Paul Feustal, as in the other case.

It is contended here that the suit to…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Railway Co. v. SheltonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1893
  2. Wilkins v. WorthenSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1896
  3. Burleson v. McDermottSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1893
  4. Barker v. FuestalSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. First National Bank v. Rhode Island InsuranceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1931
  2. Kansas City Southern Railway Co. v. AkinSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1919
  3. American Railway Express Co. v. ReevesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
  4. Storey v. SmithSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1954
  5. Union Sawmill Co. v. Pace, Campbell & DavisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1924

3 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