Cheney v. Auto Fedan Hay Press Co.
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Prairie Chancery Court, Southern District; John M. Elliott, Chancellor; 1. As to the $200 item claimed by way of cross-complaint for rice straw claimed to have been sold to appellee, the evidence seems to be evenly balanced, and we will not discuss it. 2. The court erred in not allowing the $171.75 credit claimed by appellant for hay furnished appellee through its agent, Patterson, and in not allowing the $7.70 for repairs to put the hay press in first-class…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Prairie Chancery Court, Southern District; John M. Elliott, Chancellor; 1. As to the $200 item claimed by way of cross-complaint for rice straw claimed to have been sold to appellee, the evidence seems to be evenly balanced, and we will not discuss it. 2. The court erred in not allowing the $171.75 credit claimed by appellant for hay furnished appellee through its agent, Patterson, and in not allowing the $7.70 for repairs to put the hay press in first-class condition. As to the $171.75 credit, this was a payment on the note, and should have been -allowed as a credit on the note.…
1Opinion of the CourtWood, J.
This action was begun by the appellee against the appellant in the circuit court of Prairie County on a promissory note. The appellee alleged that the appellant executed and delivered to it on March 27, 1912, his promissory note in the sum of $255.08, payable on October 1, 1912, at 8 per cent, interest; that the note with interest to January 1, 1916, was due and unpaid, and prayed judgment for same. The appellant answered admitting the execution of the note and pleaded that there had been a payment thereon of $171.75 in hay sold by the appellant to the appellee and in repairs of $7.70, making…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Continental Gin Co. v. BentonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
- Hamby v. BrooksSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1908
- Davis v. GainesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1873
3Cited by1 opinion
- Smith v. RyanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927