Valentine v. Edwards
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Lonoke Circuit Court; Eugene Lankford, Judge; STATEMENT BY THE COURT. Appellant sued to recover two bales of cotton, or their value, which appellee had purchased from one Forsythe.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Lonoke Circuit Court; Eugene Lankford, Judge; STATEMENT BY THE COURT. Appellant sued to recover two bales of cotton, or their value, which appellee had purchased from one Forsythe. According to the evidence of appellant, he had agreed to furnish Forsythe the team and tools to make a crop on his land, and the crop raised was to be his property; but after he had reserved one-half of it for the use of his land, team and tools, etc., and enough of the residue to pay for the supplies for Forsythe, which had been sold him by a merchant and charged to appellant’s account, the balance was…
1Opinion of the Court
Smith, J.,
(after stating the facts). The relation which appellant testified existed between himself and Forsythe constitutes that of employer and employee, and the title to a crop so raised vests in the employer, until he has received his share and has been paid for any supplies furnished to enable the employee to make the crop. Hammock v. Creekmore, 48 Ark. 264; St. Louis, I. M. & S. Ry. Co. v. Hardie, 87 Ark. 475; Bourland v. McKnight, 79 Ark. 427; Neal v. Brandon, 70 Ark. 79. And the court should have told the jury that if they found that relationship to exist, that appellee was not .an…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Neal v. BrandonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1902
- Bourland v. McKnightSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1906
- Hammock v. CreekmoreSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1886
- St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. HardieSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1908
3Cited by1 opinion
- Fenton v. PriceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1920