Legal Opinion · Dissent

Minton v. McDaniel

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided December 22, 1947No. 4-8366Published

1DissentEd. F. MoFaddin, Justice

I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion, because the facts — as I see them — do not bring this case within the rule of “partial delivery,” as those words are used in cases involving the statute of frauds. To constitute partial delivery, either the actual or the legal possession of the property — claimed to be delivered — must have passed from the seller to the buyer. The evidence in this case shows the entire absence of such essential. Minton had. 24 bales of low-grade cotton; and here is McDaniel’s testimony:

“ . -. . and I told him, ‘I think I can sell the cotton for you in with my…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Smith v. EvansSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1892
  2. McKinney v. Ragland & Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1924

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

Powered by the Exa API