Legal Opinion
Purnell v. Atkinson
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Decided March 30, 1970No. 5-5196PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
John A. Fogleman, Justice.
Acting for Plantation Embers, appellant Carl Purnell entered into an oral contract sometime in 1966 with Atkinson-Torrence Incorporated. Plantation Embers is a corporation engaged in the restaurant business. Atkinson-Torrence was operating as an advertising agency. By the terms of this contract Atkinson-Torrence was to handle Plantation Embers’ advertising with KATV. This agreement was evidenced by a written authorization from Purnell to KATV, the content of which is not disclosed. A part of the advertising agency’s responsibility involved the preparation of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Baker v. Missouri National Life Insurance CompanyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1963
- Leader Co. v. Little Rock Railway & Electric Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
- Roberts Cotton Oil Co. v. F. E. Morse & Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- Petitt v. F. v. H. Collins Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1941
- Warrick v. Estate of McKnabSupreme Court of Kansas · 1947
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Smith v. Cumberland Group, Ltd.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
- T.P. Leasing Corp. v. Baker Leasing Corp.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1987
- Osborn v. Commanche Cattle Industries, Inc.Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1975
- Daniels Ins., Inc. v. Daon Corp.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1987
- North Little Rock Urban Renewal Agency v. Van BibberSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1972
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.