Jaggers v. Graham
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Garland Circuit Court; Scott Wood, Judge; 1. The verdict is contrary to the law and the evidence. Appellant was the procuring cause of the sale, and the evidence shows it. 2. The instructions to the jury are erroneous. As the instructions are not set out in the abstract nor passed on by the court, it is unnecessary and useless to cite the many authorities for appellant. 3. The court erred in the admission and rejection of évidenee to the prejudice of appellant.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Garland Circuit Court; Scott Wood, Judge; 1. The verdict is contrary to the law and the evidence. Appellant was the procuring cause of the sale, and the evidence shows it. 2. The instructions to the jury are erroneous. As the instructions are not set out in the abstract nor passed on by the court, it is unnecessary and useless to cite the many authorities for appellant. 3. The court erred in the admission and rejection of évidenee to the prejudice of appellant. Mrs. Jaggers made the sale; did more than enough to entitle her to her commissions. 101 Ark. 376; 105 Id. 213; 87 Id.…
1Opinion of the Court
Humphreys, J'.
The appellant, Mrs. J. R. Jaggers, filed a suit in the Garland Court of Common Pleas for commissions on a sale of certain real estate in the city of Hot Springs, against the appellee, C. M. Graham. She alleged in her complaint that Graham had listed said real estate with her for sale and had agreed to pay her a commission of five per cent, in case she should make a sale of said real estate; and that in pursuance of the agreement she sold said real estate'to Will Woodcock for the sum of $2,000, and prayed for a judgment against Graham for the sum of $100 and costs.
The appellee…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Bray Clothing Co. v. McKinneySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- Western Union Telegraph Co. v. DukeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1913
- Burton v. CreelSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1916