Legal Opinion

Wyatt v. Yingling

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided March 29, 1948No. 4-8454PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.

Appellants seek by this suit to enforce the specific performance of a contract to sell them a farm. Appellee has welshed on his contract, as the undisputed evidence shows the moral obligation to convey, but mere moral obligation to perform a contract does not suffice to grant the relief prayed. The Statute of Frauds provides that “No action shall be brought ... to charge any person upon any contract for the sale of lands, tenements or hereditaments, or any interest in or concerning them . . . unless some memorandum or note thereof, shall be made in writing, and signed by the party to be…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Tate v. ClarkSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1941
  2. Perrin v. PriceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1946
  3. Harris v. DacusSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1946

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Van Dyke v. GloverSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1996
  2. Betnar v. RoseSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1976
  3. Shipp v. Bell & Ross Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1974
  4. Reynolds v. HavensSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1972
  5. Jonesboro Investment Corp. v. CherrySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1965

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API