Legal Opinion

Somers v. Musolf

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided April 20, 1908PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Appeal from Benton Chancery Court; T. Haden Humphreys, Chancellor; STATEMENT BY THE COURT. The plaintiff, Julius Musolf, and 'defendant, Edward Somers, on November 1, 1899, entered into a written contract whereby the latter leased his farm in Benton County to the former for a term of five years, and employed him to manage and cultivate the farm during said term.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Benton Chancery Court; T. Haden Humphreys, Chancellor; STATEMENT BY THE COURT. The plaintiff, Julius Musolf, and 'defendant, Edward Somers, on November 1, 1899, entered into a written contract whereby the latter leased his farm in Benton County to the former for a term of five years, and employed him to manage and cultivate the farm during said term. The contract seems to be in the nature of both a lease of the lands and a contract for hire of the services of Musolf and his family. The contract provides, in. substance, that Somers, the lessor, should furnish the farm in question,…

1Opinion of the Court

McCulloch, J.,

(after stating the facts.) Counsel for appellants make the following summary of their contention as to the incorrectness of the chancellor’s findings and decree:

“First. In holding that plaintiff should recover one-half of the amount of apples, peaches and strawberries produced, less the expense of gathering and marketing the same above the labor of Musolf and brothers, $621.07.. “Second. In holding that there were 100 acres of land fit for general farming purposes, to be accounted for.
“Third. In refusing to allow defendants in the accounting for the money earned by brothers of…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Holtz v. OldsOregon Supreme Court · 1917
  2. Crawford v. General Contract CorporationDistrict Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1959
  3. Esselstyn v. Meyer & Chapman State BankMontana Supreme Court · 1922
  4. Silbernagel v. Hirsch Distilling Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1938
  5. Ashley, Drew & Northern Railway Co. v. Baggott & BoydSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1916

1 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