Neal v. Brandon
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from St. Francis Circuit Court. Hance N. Hutton, Judge. statement by the court. This was a suit by Brandon & Baugh, mortgagees, to replevy some mules. The answer and amended answer and cross complaint denied any indebtedness under the mortgage, and claimed that appellees owed appellant a small amount.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Francis Circuit Court. Hance N. Hutton, Judge. statement by the court. This was a suit by Brandon & Baugh, mortgagees, to replevy some mules. The answer and amended answer and cross complaint denied any indebtedness under the mortgage, and claimed that appellees owed appellant a small amount. Appellees contended that appellant, Neal, the mortgagor, was indebted to them not only on his own account, but that he was also liable on his mortgage for the account of one Tom Hall, a tenant, whom they had furnished at appellant’s request, and they produced testimony tending to support…
1Opinion of the Court
Wood, J.,
(after stating the facts.) The court erred in telling the jury “that defendant, Neal, was not entitled to the credit claimed by him on his account with Brandon & Baugh for the value of the mules and corn furnished by him to Tom Hall to make a crop.” The uncontradicted proof shows that two mules valued at $115, and corn valued at $44, were furnished Hall to make the crop. The proof shows also that appellees knew that appellant had furnished his tenant the mules. The circumstances were such as to put them on inquiry as to any supplies furnished. They received the crop of Hall, upon…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Tinsley v. CraigeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1891
3Cited by16 opinions
- Arkansas & Louisiana Railway Co. v. StroudeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Crosby v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1922
- J. T. Fargason Co. v. FurstCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1923
- Jacobson v. AtkinsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
- Neal v. BrandonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.