Western Cabinet & Fixture Manufacturing Co. v. Davis
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Sebastian Circuit Court, Fort Smith District; Daniel Hon, Judge; 1. The written instrument constituted the entire and complete contract between the parties and no proof of prior statements or representations of appellant was admissible. No parol warranty could be engrafted upon the written contract. 83 Ark. 105; 97 iS.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Sebastian Circuit Court, Fort Smith District; Daniel Hon, Judge; 1. The written instrument constituted the entire and complete contract between the parties and no proof of prior statements or representations of appellant was admissible. No parol warranty could be engrafted upon the written contract. 83 Ark. 105; 97 iS. W. 681; 80 Ark. 505-8; 104 Ark. 488; 83 Id. 240-2 ; 73 Id. 542; 60 Id. 387. 2. The ¡burden was on the plaintiff and he was entitled to open and close the argument. 3. It wias error to submit to the jury, as a question of fact, whether there was an implied warranty…
1Opinion of the Court
•Smith, J.
This suit was brought to enforce the payment of the balance alleged to be due upon a contract for the sale 'and installation of certain drug store fixtures and a soda fountain. The -contract price was $5,100 -of which 'all had been paid except the -sum of $2,311.26.
Attached to the complaint as -an exhibit thereto were the “¡Specifications for Set of Drug Fixtures and Soda Fountain.” These specifications described the various fixtures land the fountain. The specifications for the fountain gave the dimensions and, among -other things provided:
“Working apparatus to be -composed of two…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Kellogg Bridge Co. v. HamiltonSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Davis Calyx Drill Co. v. MalloryCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1905
- Bunch v. WeilSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1904
- Weed v. DyerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1890
- Main v. DearingSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Co. v. CoxSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1926
- Modern Farm Service, Inc. v. Ben Pearson, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1962
- Dyke v. MagdalenaSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1926
- Parrett Tractor Co. v. BrownfielSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1921
- Kull v. NobleSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1928
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.