W. B. Worthen Co. v. Vogler
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Pulaski Chancery Court, John E. Mattineau, Chancellor; 1. ' The oral agreement or promise, even if sufficient to constitute a trust, was void under the statute of frauds, and regardless of the existence of any trust both Worthen Company and Mrs. Worthen were innocent purchasers without notice and for substantial value, and (3) that Vogler can not come into equity and admitting the fact that Mr. Worthen had insisted-in the previous transaction that his bank would…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Pulaski Chancery Court, John E. Mattineau, Chancellor; 1. ' The oral agreement or promise, even if sufficient to constitute a trust, was void under the statute of frauds, and regardless of the existence of any trust both Worthen Company and Mrs. Worthen were innocent purchasers without notice and for substantial value, and (3) that Vogler can not come into equity and admitting the fact that Mr. Worthen had insisted-in the previous transaction that his bank would not loan money on the property if he, Yogler, “had anything to do with it,” and having stood by and seen a large sum of…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, C. J.
Appellee, Henry 0. Vogler, was, prior to the year 1918, the owner of considerable real estate in the oities of Little Rock and North Little Rock, and he mortgaged the same to W. B. Worthen Company, á banking corporation of Little Rock, and tlie People’s Savings Bank, another banking institution, to secure certain debts which at the time of the foreclosure of the mortgages amounted to upward of the sum of $40,000. The mortgage to W. .B. Worthen Company was prior to the one to the other bank, but both mortgages were foreclosed in the same decree rendered July 1, 1918, directing a sale of the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Spradling v. SpradlingSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- Gainus v. CannonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1884
- Ammonette v. BlackSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1904
- Bland v. TalleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1887
- Bragg v. HartneySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Carkonen v. AlbertsWashington Supreme Court · 1938
- Roberts v. PrattSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1921
- George v. DonohueSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1935
- Pharr v. FinkSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1922