Legal Opinion

Rutherford v. Wilson

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided May 30, 1910PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Appeal from Independence Circuit Court; Charles Coffin, Judge; In no case is the tenant allowed to cut wood for sale unless this is the customary mode of using the land. Tied: on Real Prop., § 74. And this rule applies to a dowress. 4 Kent, Com. 76. The cutting and selling of timber by a life tenant is waste for which the reversioner may sue. 92 Am. St. R. 621; 53 Am.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Independence Circuit Court; Charles Coffin, Judge; In no case is the tenant allowed to cut wood for sale unless this is the customary mode of using the land. Tied: on Real Prop., § 74. And this rule applies to a dowress. 4 Kent, Com. 76. The cutting and selling of timber by a life tenant is waste for which the reversioner may sue. 92 Am. St. R. 621; 53 Am. Dec. 621. The timber can only be cut or used for the proper enjoyment of the estate for life, and not merely for sale. 63 Ark. 15. A verdict should have been directed for plaintiff, for defendant failed to make out a defense. 35…

1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, C. J.

A tract of land in Independence County,' containing 229.32 acres, was assigned to the defendant, Mrs. Angie Wilson, as dower out of the estate of her deceased husband, about 150 acres of this tract being cleared and in cultivation, and the remainder being woodland. Plaintiff, W. A. Rutherford, is the owner of the reversion.

In the year 1907 defendant sold and allowed to be removed the timber on 20 or 25 acres of the. woodland, for which she received the sum of $104.77, its market value; and in February, 1909, plaintiff instituted this action against her to recover said sum so received,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Cherokee Construction Co. v. HarrisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
  2. Potter v. LansingNew York Supreme Court · 1806
  3. Davis v. ClarkMissouri Court of Appeals · 1890
  4. Nashville Lumber Co. v. BarefieldSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
  5. McLeod v. DialSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1896

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Poole v. Union Trust Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1916
  2. McCarroll v. FallsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1917
  3. Lee & Bradshaw v. RogersSupreme Court of Georgia · 1921
  4. Haseman v. Union Bank of MenaSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1980
  5. Hall v. MeadeCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1932

4 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