McCarron v. Cassidy
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Sebastian county in Chancery. That parol testimony is admissible to show that a deed, absolute upon its face, was intended as a mortgage, is no longer an open question. 4 John. Gh.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Sebastian county in Chancery. That parol testimony is admissible to show that a deed, absolute upon its face, was intended as a mortgage, is no longer an open question. 4 John. Gh. Rep., 167; 4 Kent 141, A. seq.; 3 Dana. 27G; 1 Hozo. 8. C. 11., 118; Russell vs. Southard et al. 12 Hoiv. 189; 4 Blackf., 539; American Notes to Thornbrough vs. Baker, and Howard vs. Harris, Pt. 2d, vol. 2, Lead, cases in equity, 432, et seq.; Blackmore vs. Burnside, 2 Eng. 505; Johnson Esq. vs. Clark, 5 Ark.; Scott, White & Co. vs. Cunningham, 13 Ark. Whenever it is made to appear,…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hanly
This was a bill filed by the appellee, against the appellant and one Mitchell Sparks, in the Sebastian Circuit Court, on the 17th October, 1851, alleging, as far as it is material to notice, that on the 2d January, 1847, he was seized and possessed oí two certain lots in the town of Fort Smith, on which was a large two story brick house, and other buildings and valuable improvements: and being embarrassed with debts, he applied to the defendant Sparks, to advance .to him enough money to pay offhis debts, and to defray his expenses to Texas, whither he was about to leave, and offered him the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Blair v. BassIndiana Supreme Court · 1838
3Cited by5 opinions
- Kent v. TallentSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1919
- Young v. Evans-Snyder-Buel Commission Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1900
- Allen v. HightowerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1860
- Burns v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1921
- Yudelson v. Northwestern Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1942