Legal Opinion

Mitchell v. Goodall

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided December 12, 1988No. 88-223PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

David Newbern, Justice.

This is a breach of contract case. The appellee, Robert Goodall, alleged that the appellant, James C. Mitchell, orally agreed that Goodall could run cattle on Mitchell’s land indefinitely in exchange for improvements to be made on the land by Goodall. There was no written lease, but Mitchell testified Goodall was to have the land for three years. Goodall was in the process of being divorced. Goodall contended that Mitchell had maliciously instigated the sale of Goodall’s cattle, ostensibly under the authority of the divorce court, just to get his land back after Goodall…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Polnac-Hartman & Associates v. First National BankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1987
  2. McDaniel v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1958
  3. North Arkansas & Western Railway Co. v. ColeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1902
  4. Puckett v. PuckettSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1986
  5. Hooper-Bond Ltd. Partnership Fund III v. RagarSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1988

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Willson Safety Products v. EschenbrennerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1990
  2. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance v. DaggettSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2003
  3. Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers v. Arkansas Public Service CommissionCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1991
  4. Farmers Bank of Greenwood v. PerrySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1990
  5. Reagan v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1994

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API