Jones v. Hall
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Garland Chancery Court; J. P. Henderson, Chancellor; STATEMENT oe eaots. This suit was instituted by the appellees against appellant to foreclose a vendor’s lien on a house and lot in the city of Hot Springs.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Garland Chancery Court; J. P. Henderson, Chancellor; STATEMENT oe eaots. This suit was instituted by the appellees against appellant to foreclose a vendor’s lien on a house and lot in the city of Hot Springs. Appellees alleged that the property was sold to appellant for the sum of $1,700; that the sum of $500 was paid in cash, and that the balance was to be paid in semi-annual installments of $60 each; that there was a balance due on the purchase price, including principal and interest, taxes and insurance, in the sum of $508.61, for which they asked judgment. The appellant…
1Opinion of the Court
Wood, J.,
(after stating the facts). We are confronted, in limine, with the motion to dismiss the appeal. This motion must be granted for the reason that the execution docket'shows that the appellant accepted the fruits of a settlement made according to the terms of the decree from which she prosecutes this appeal. Appellant “can not have her cake and eat it, too.” The case on the motion to dismiss is controlled by Coston v. Lee Wilson & Co., 109 Ark. 548-550, where, quoting from Bolen v. Cumby, 53 Ark. 513, we held: “A party may prosecute his appeal from a judgment partly in his favor and…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bechtel v. EvansIdaho Supreme Court · 1904
- Coston v. Lee Wilson & Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1913
3Cited by9 opinions
- McCown v. NicksSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1926
- Wilson v. FullertonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1998
- Hutton v. PeaseSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1935
- Cranford v. HodgesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1920
- Gate City Building & Loan Ass'n v. FrisbySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1928
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.