Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. of Ark. v. Wright

Darrell Hickman, Justice.

The primary question presented in this case is whether, since the passage of Act 401 of 1981, a farmer who orally sells his grain to a licensed grain warehouseman, who subsequently goes bankrupt, can void the sale and recover the unpaid purchase price from the company that purchased the grain from the warehouseman. The trial court held that the farmer, appellee Wright, is entitled to recover. We disagree.

We believe the purpose of Act 401 is to protect farmers who have stored their grain in warehouses, not those who have made an outright sale of their grain to a…