Thomas v. Dudrey

I must respectfully dissent from the court’s affirmance of the judgment below. The court’s opinion affirms the judgment upon an issue that was not stated or briefed by the appellee. As hereafter noted, the court concludes that Thomas is suing the defendants for breach of a duty Mrs. Dudrey assumed when she purchased the quarter section in 1966. In my judgment, the court’s opinion does not correctly construe or apply the Soil Bank Act (7 U. S. C. A. 1801, et seq.), the Regulations of the Secretary of Agriculture, the terms and provisions of the Conservation Reserve Contracts, and the findings…