McFarlane v. York
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court; Edward W. Winfield, Judge; Where, at the time of the execution of a promissory note, the parties execute a written agreement specifying the manner of payment, the note and agreement are to be construed together as one instrument. 4 Am. & Eng.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court; Edward W. Winfield, Judge; Where, at the time of the execution of a promissory note, the parties execute a written agreement specifying the manner of payment, the note and agreement are to be construed together as one instrument. 4 Am. & Eng. Enc. of L., 2d Ed., 144. While ordinarily, since the contract stipulated that payments before maturity could be made in coal, the right to pay in coal would cease 'at the maturity of the note, yet, if appellants were prevented from this manner of payment by the failure or refusal of appellee to order the coal and to…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, C. J.
York sued McFarlane, Prior and Mc-Kelvey on a past due promissory note for $2200, and recovered judgment below for the amount of the note with interest. Defendants pleaded as a defense that under a contemporaneous written agreement with plaintiff they had the right to pay said note in coal, and that they had from time to time offered to deliver coal in satisfaction of the note, which plaintiff had refused to accept. The facts in the case are undisputed, and are in substance as follows:
At the time of the transaction in question, York was presi- ' dent of the Bluff City Lumber Company, of Pine…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Leslie v. BellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1904
- Allen-West Commission Co. v. People's BankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Inglish v. WatkinsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1842
3Cited by3 opinions
- National Pigments & Chemical Co. v. C. K. Williams & Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1938
- Cook v. TalbertSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1950
- Jones v. HeinzleIndiana Court of Appeals · 1921