Little v. Arkansas National Bank
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Benton Circnit Court; J. S. Maples, Judge; 1. The court erred in sustaining appellee’s motion to strike out parts of appellant’s answer.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Benton Circnit Court; J. S. Maples, Judge; 1. The court erred in sustaining appellee’s motion to strike out parts of appellant’s answer. If the allegations so stricken out are true, they constitute a defense to the note sued on. 127 S. W. (Ark.) 968; 25 Cyc. 706; Id. 758; 29 Cyc. 117; 22 L. R. A. 291; 135 S. W. 807. The introduction of parol testimony proving such allegations would be no violation of the rule that parol testimony can not be introduced to vary or contradict a written instrument, since this principle does not apply so as to preclude the admission of evidence to show…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, C. J.
Appellants executed to one J. O. Gunter two negotiable promissory notes, each for the sum of $837.10, due and payable three and six months, respectively, after date, and Gunter assigned the notes to appellee, a banking corporation doing business in the city of Fayetteville, Arkansas. Appellee instituted this action to recover of appellants the amount of the two notes with interest. Appellants, for defense to the action, pleaded want of valid consideration for the execution of the notes sued on, alleging that Gunter was the soliciting agent for a certain life insurance company; that the notes…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- German Bank v. DeShonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1883
- McRae v. WarmackSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- Hencke v. StandifordSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1899
- Taylor v. PurcellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1895
- Martin v. TuckerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1880
3Cited by3 opinions
- Security Mutual Life Insurance v. LittleSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
- Tate v. GouldSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
- Lincoln Reserve Life Insurance v. JonesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1928