Waldstein v. Barnett
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Garland Chancery Court; Jethro P. Henderson, Chancellor; STATEMENT BY THE COURT. Appellees sued to recover a certain lot situated in the city of Hot Springs, and for an accounting for the rents thereon.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Garland Chancery Court; Jethro P. Henderson, Chancellor; STATEMENT BY THE COURT. Appellees sued to recover a certain lot situated in the city of Hot Springs, and for an accounting for the rents thereon. They alleged that at the time of their mother’s death said property was occupied as a homestead and at her death descended to her children, the plaintiffs herein, and their brothers and sisters in equal shares, subject, however, to the right of those who were minors to occupy said property under the homestead laws. That at their mother’s death the defendant Wáldstein and his wife,…
1Opinion of the Court
Smith, J.,
(after stating the facts). Notwithstanding the fiduciary relation between appellant • and ' his wards, he still had the right to purchase their property. But this was not an absolute right to be exercised as one person might purchase from another. This question was discussed in the case of Reeder v. Meredith, 78 Ark. Ill, where an administration was being had upon the estate of the administrator’s father and the administrator bought the interest of his sister in the lands of the estate. Many authorities were reviewed and it was there said: “The general rule, says Mr. Perry, is ‘that…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Daniel v. TolonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- McLaughlin v. MorrisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1921
- Watkins v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1962
- Sconyers v. SconyersSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1919