Joyner v. Hall
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Poinsett Circuit Court in Chancery. Hon. L. L. Mack, Circuit Judge. Proof shows the purchase-money was not paid as recited, and the burden was on defendant to show payment afterwards. Joyner was in possession claiming a lien for purchase-money. This was adverse, and defendant was not entitled to partition.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Poinsett Circuit Court in Chancery. Hon. L. L. Mack, Circuit Judge. Proof shows the purchase-money was not paid as recited, and the burden was on defendant to show payment afterwards. Joyner was in possession claiming a lien for purchase-money. This was adverse, and defendant was not entitled to partition. Claimed upon the record, that the decree dismissing Joyner’s bill, be affirmed, and the decree reversed for relief on the cross-bill, settlement with receiver, etc.
1Opinion of the Court
Engh,ish, O. J.
On the twenty-ninth of August, 1876, Roderick Joyner filed a bill on the chancery side of the circuit court of Poinsett county against Joseph S. Hall and Matilda 0. Hall, alleging, in substance, that on the twenty-sixth day of August, 1873, he purchased of Madison Anderson and others (naming them), and by deed of that date, which is exhibited, they conveyed to him, certain lands situated in said county, which are described, containing 320 acres. That of the purchase-money he paid $504.81J cash, and gave two notes, each for a like sum, payable twenty - fifth December, 1874, and…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Feild v. WatersSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1921
- Spivey v. TaylorSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1920
- Van Gundy v. Caudle, County JudgeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1944
- Hall v. NeedlesCourt Of Appeals Of Indian Territory · 1897
- Jones Truck Lines Co. v. Powell Bros. Truck Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1938
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.