Faulkner v. Crawford
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Lonoke Circuit Court; Eugene Lank-ford, Judge; 1. Tbe evidence does not ¡support tlie verdict. Improper evidence was -adduced. 95 Ark. 233, 238; 74 Id. 300, 256, 259, 260; 102 Id. 435, 438. Beadle was never released, and it is not ¡shown that Faulkner ¡assumed the payment of the commission. 102 Ark. 407, 409, 410. 2. Even if Crawford orally ¡assumed the payment of Beadle’s debt, the promise is within the statute of frauds. 102 Ark. 407. 3. It was error -to refuse…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Lonoke Circuit Court; Eugene Lank-ford, Judge; 1. Tbe evidence does not ¡support tlie verdict. Improper evidence was -adduced. 95 Ark. 233, 238; 74 Id. 300, 256, 259, 260; 102 Id. 435, 438. Beadle was never released, and it is not ¡shown that Faulkner ¡assumed the payment of the commission. 102 Ark. 407, 409, 410. 2. Even if Crawford orally ¡assumed the payment of Beadle’s debt, the promise is within the statute of frauds. 102 Ark. 407. 3. It was error -to refuse to receive the first verdict. 40 N. T. Sup. Ct. 271; 22 Erne. PI. & Pr., p. 970, par. 2; 4 Watts (Pa.) 357. The verdict…
1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.
Dr. C. L. Crawford sued Francis R. Faulkner and Oscar Beadle to recover a real estate broker’s commission. The case wa,s tried before a jury, which returned a verdict for the plaintiff against the' defendant, Faulkner, and from the judgment rendered Faulkner has appealed.
The facts are as follows: The defendant, Beadle, in August, 1912, listed his farm and certain personal property on it with plaintiff, Crawford, for sale and agreed to pay him 5 per cent commission therefor. Doctor Crawford had formerly lived in Chaves County, New Mexico, amid he wrote back there to defendant, Faulkner, asking…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Scott v. MooreSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
3Cited by2 opinions
- Mitchell v. KennadyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1921
- Palmer v. DillardSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1954