Spencer Lumber Co. v. Dover
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Polk Circuit Court; Jeff T. Cowling, Judge; Fraud and deceit with reference to the condition of the mill and machinery was available as a defense by way of counterclaim, and evidence outside of the bill of sale was admissible.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Polk Circuit Court; Jeff T. Cowling, Judge; Fraud and deceit with reference to the condition of the mill and machinery was available as a defense by way of counterclaim, and evidence outside of the bill of sale was admissible. The bill of sale, being merely an instrument for the passing of ownership, does not preclude a showing of fraud on the part of the vendor. 38 Ark. 334; 6 Enc. of Ev. 22; Id. 16; 20 Cyc. 112; 43 Ark. 439, 448; 60 Ark. 387; 156 Mass. 135; 22 Ark. 454. The only warranty in the bill of sale was as to the title, and parol evidence was not admissible to show any…
1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.
This appeal is prosecuted to reverse the judgment upon a directed verdict in a suit on a promissory note for six hundred eighty-three dollars and three cents ($683.03). The note is dated' May 2, 1910, and was given for the purchase price of certain machinery and lumber and logs. Appellant refused to pay'the note, and, when sued by appellee, set up by way of defense certain alleged fraudulent representations in regard to the condition of the machinery when sold, breach of warranty and damage in consequence. The machinery was purchased on the first day of March, 1910, and appellant immediately…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- J. I. Case Threshing Machine Co. v. BaileySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- James & Co. v. Bocage & Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1885
3Cited by4 opinions
- McConnell v. BourlandSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
- Trannum v. GeorgeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1947
- Arkansas State Game & Fish Commission v. KizerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1952
- Hignight v. Blevins Implement Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1952