Hot Springs Savings, Trust & Guaranty Co. v. Sumpter
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Garland Circuit Court; Scott Wood, Judge; 1. All questions presented in the case were decided by the Supreme Court on appeal from the decree of the chancery court, except the regularity of the execution sales. 140 Ark. 91. 2. All questions regarding the regularity and validity of the execution sales were presented to the chancery court by bill of review, wherein the various transactions which had occurred prior to that time were alleged, including the foreclosure…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Garland Circuit Court; Scott Wood, Judge; 1. All questions presented in the case were decided by the Supreme Court on appeal from the decree of the chancery court, except the regularity of the execution sales. 140 Ark. 91. 2. All questions regarding the regularity and validity of the execution sales were presented to the chancery court by bill of review, wherein the various transactions which had occurred prior to that time were alleged, including the foreclosure proceedings; appeal, return of the mandate, appointment of a commissioner, sale of the lot to Wm. Sumpter, execution of…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, C. J.
Mrs. Nannie E. Sumpter, one of the appellees, was the owner of certain rear estate in the city of Hot Springs, including a lot described as lot 1 in block 112, known as the Sumpter House property, and she mortgaged it to appellant to secure an indebtedness of $14,000, evidenced by promissory note.
Appellant obtained a decree of the chancery court of Garland county foreclosing the mortgage, the indebtedness at -that time, including accumulated interest and costs, being the aggregate sum of $17,100, and the property was ordered to be sold by a commissioner of the court. At the sale by the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Whitmore v. TatumSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1891
- Sumpter v. Hot Springs Savings, Trust & Guaranty Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1919