Legal Opinion

Bell Lumber Co. v. Alewine

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided March 10, 1924PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Hart, J.,

(after stating the facts). It is first insisted that the evidence is not sufficient to support the verdict. The contention in this respect is that the minds of the parties did not meet as to the price to be paid for the lumber. We cannot agree with counsel in this contention. According to the testimony of both the plaintiff and the defendants, there was a meeting of the minds of the parties as to the price to be paid for the lumber; but their testimony is in direct conflict as to what price the parties agreed upon.

On the one hand, the plaintiff testified that the defendants agreed to…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Charlesworth v. WhitlowSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
  2. Wimberley Grocer Co. v. Brandon Craig & Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1923

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Nelson v. Chicago Mill & Lumber CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1935
  2. Gulf Refining Co. v. Williams Roofing Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1945

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API