Webb v. Marlar
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Union Chancery Court; Bmon O. Mahoney, Chancellor; 1. It was error to hold that the contract bore no interest. When no interest is agreed upon, the rate is six per cent.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Union Chancery Court; Bmon O. Mahoney, Chancellor; 1. It was error to hold that the contract bore no interest. When no interest is agreed upon, the rate is six per cent. Art. 19, § 13, Const. . 2. No items should have been allowed as credits alleged to have accrued after the institution of the suit. 21 Ark. 137; 15 Ark. 315; 21 Ark. no. 3. “A suit for specific performance of a contract for the sale of land can not be maintained by the purchaser, unless he shows that he has paid the purchase price, or tendered it to the vendor before the commencement of suit, or shows a good excuse…
1Opinion of the CourtHiie, C. J.
Marlar brought suit against his fathér-in-law, J. L. Webb, and his brother-in-law, Shuler Webb, to require J. E. Webb to make him a deed to land which he had verbally sold him, and to cancel a deed which J. E. Webb had made to Shuler Webb. The plaintiff alleged that he had gone into possession of the land under a verbal contract, and that he had paid the purchase price, giving the dates of payments; and, in fact, had overpaid the purchase money by the sum of $60.44. JE, Webb admits the parol sale of the land, but takes issue with the amount of payments, and alleges that he has paid, at the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Norman v. PughSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Kellums v. RichardsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1860
- Mason v. AtkinsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
3Cited by1 opinion
- Gamble v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1953