Shields v. Smith
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL frorp Pulaski Chancery Court. Hon. John R. Eakin, Chancellor. The decree in the former suit (to which Smith was a party) settled the matter as between the parties and their privies. Freeman on Judgments, secs. 248 — 49 and 330. The Chancellor improperly assumed that Fagan might be presumed, from his agency, to have the power to release the lien of the Hannibal Company.
Read the full summary
APPEAL frorp Pulaski Chancery Court. Hon. John R. Eakin, Chancellor. The decree in the former suit (to which Smith was a party) settled the matter as between the parties and their privies. Freeman on Judgments, secs. 248 — 49 and 330. The Chancellor improperly assumed that Fagan might be presumed, from his agency, to have the power to release the lien of the Hannibal Company. Eagan had no power to act as‘agent for both companies, where their interests are not identical, or might be in conflict. Story on Agency, sec. 210; 17 Barb., 132;-14 N. Y., 85. The burden of proof to prove the agents’…
1Opinion of the Court
Caeuth. S. J.
Smith filed his complaint in the Pulaski. ■Chancery Court, in which he alleged that on the thirtieth April, 1873, he lent to the Arkansas Insurance Company $3115, for which he took a note, secured by mortgage on the lot in controversy. The Insurance Company took title by purchase from Edward Fulton and wife, Wm. H. Fulton and wife,' and John Wassel and wife. The title came through Wassel, the other two deeds having been taken merely to satisfy all doubts. .Wassel got his title from Wm. H. Fulton and Lavinia C., his wife, Mrs. Fulton having been the owner of the land. On the…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Rogers v. HillSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1950
- Rosewater v. Schwab Clothing Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1894
- Larch Mountain Invest. Co. v. GarbadeOregon Supreme Court · 1902
- American Surety Co. v. BallmanCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1902
- Conley v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1901
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.