Cooper v. Burel
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Lawrence Circuit Court, Eastern District; Dene H. Coleman, Judge; 1. It is admitted that Mrs. Burel was a married woman, but the team was sold to her for the purpose of making a crop upon land of defendant in 1914, and she signed the note as surety, and the court erred in instructing the jury to return a verdict for Mrs. Burel.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Lawrence Circuit Court, Eastern District; Dene H. Coleman, Judge; 1. It is admitted that Mrs. Burel was a married woman, but the team was sold to her for the purpose of making a crop upon land of defendant in 1914, and she signed the note as surety, and the court erred in instructing the jury to return a verdict for Mrs. Burel. The court erred in not permitting appellant to show that Mrs. Burel secured herself by taking the mortgage upon the property for which the note was given. She was acting for the interest and benefit of her private and separate estate and is bound. 92 Ark.…
1Opinion of the CourtHumphreys, J.
Appellant brought suit against appellee in the Lawrence Circuit Court for the Eastern District, upon a promissory note for $350, executed on the 2d day of December, 1913, by appellees to appellant. It was alleged in the complaint that Lizzie Burel executed the note for the benefit of her personal and private estate. Lizzie Burel filed a separate answer, pleading as defenses coverture and payment. She denied that the note was executed for the benefit of her separate estate.
The cause was -heard upon the pleadings and evidence and a verdict was returned in favor of appellee, Lizzie Burel.…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hickey v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1889
- Goldsmith Bros. v. MooreSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1913
- Alphin v. WadeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- Chittim v. Armour & Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1916
3Cited by1 opinion
- Bradley Lbr. Co. of Ark. v. HenrySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1934