Findley v. Means
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Pope Circuit Court. William L. Moose, Judge. The court erred in not admitting the evidence offered to prove the conditional nature of the undertaking. 19 Ark. 495; 57 Ark. 72; 22 L. B. A. 619; 1 111. App. 612; 5,Mo. App. 580. In any view of the case, actual compensation would be the extent of the recovery allowed. 19 Am. & Eng. Enc: Law, 410; Sedg. Dam. 492-3; 14 Ark. 316; 55 Ark. 376; 57 Ark. 168; 45 c.e.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Pope Circuit Court. William L. Moose, Judge. The court erred in not admitting the evidence offered to prove the conditional nature of the undertaking. 19 Ark. 495; 57 Ark. 72; 22 L. B. A. 619; 1 111. App. 612; 5,Mo. App. 580. In any view of the case, actual compensation would be the extent of the recovery allowed. 19 Am. & Eng. Enc: Law, 410; Sedg. Dam. 492-3; 14 Ark. 316; 55 Ark. 376; 57 Ark. 168; 45 c.e. A. 343; 53 L. E.' A. 122. The court properly refused to admit parol evidence to vary or contradict the written contract. 1 Greenleaf, Ev. §§ 275, 85; 52 Ark. 65; 51 Ark. 441; 45…
1Opinion of the Court
Battle, J. T.
E. Means had a contract with the United States to transport the mail on route No. 47,529, from Dardanelle to Carden’s Bottoms, in this state, and return, six times a week, from October 1, 1899, to June 30, 190£, and sublet the same to W. W. Findley, as principal, and John Findley and O. R. Findley, as sureties. The Findleys having failed to perform their contract, Means brought this action against them to recover $300, the liquidated damages they stipulated to pay him on account of such nonperformance.
One of the defenses to the action was that it was expressly understood and…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Campbell v. JonesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1889
- Pope ex rel. Reed v. LathamSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1838
- Inglish v. BrenemanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1844
- Chandler v. ChandlerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1860
3Cited by2 opinions
- Graham v. RemmelSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- McGinn v. B. H. Gladding Dry Goods Co.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 1917