Pitchcock v. Donnahoo
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Saline Circuit Court. Alexander M. Duefie, Judge. STATEMENT BY THE COURT. This suit was brought to enforce a lien on a mare for the service of a stallion. The right to recover and to a lien was denied; it being alleged that the services were by insurance contract, and that the mare was not with foal. The plaintiff showed the service and its value, and stated that the service was rendered under a notice which was “all the contract there ever was.”
Read the full summary
Appeal from Saline Circuit Court. Alexander M. Duefie, Judge. STATEMENT BY THE COURT. This suit was brought to enforce a lien on a mare for the service of a stallion. The right to recover and to a lien was denied; it being alleged that the services were by insurance contract, and that the mare was not with foal. The plaintiff showed the service and its value, and stated that the service was rendered under a notice which was “all the contract there ever was.” The notice contained this clause: “Fee insurance, $8. The usual lien for services will be reserved on mares, and fees due when mares are…
1Opinion of the Court
Wood, J.,
(after stating the facts.) The court, sitting as a jury, was justified in finding and declaring the contract one of insurance upon condition. The service was rendered with the assurance that there should be no charge unless there was a foal, provided the owner of the mare did not sell or trade her during the period of gestation. The statute provides a lien from the time of service, which shall not be lost by reason of any sale, exchange, removal, or other disposition of the animal served, without the consent of the owner of the lien. But upon such disposition of the animal the lien…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Cummins v. PeedIndiana Supreme Court · 1887
3Cited by2 opinions
- Snyder v. SlattonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- Webb v. SmithSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1928