Wood v. Stewart
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Crawford Chancery Court; /. Virgil Bourland, Chancellor; 1. The question whether appellee signed as a witness or as a guarantor was one of fact upon which appellant was entitled to have a jury to pass; and appellant should have been placed in position to have this question properly submitted, in a court of law. 35 Ark. 125. 2. If the allegations of the complaint are true, it does not state facts sufficient to authorize a court of chancery to interfere with the…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Crawford Chancery Court; /. Virgil Bourland, Chancellor; 1. The question whether appellee signed as a witness or as a guarantor was one of fact upon which appellant was entitled to have a jury to pass; and appellant should have been placed in position to have this question properly submitted, in a court of law. 35 Ark. 125. 2. If the allegations of the complaint are true, it does not state facts sufficient to authorize a court of chancery to interfere with the collection of a judgment at law. 50 Ark. 458; 57 Ark. 599. The burden was upon the appellee to aver and prove a…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCueeoch, J.
Appellant, John E. Wood, purchased a jack from one H. N. Bell for the price of $500, which was paid. At the time of the sale a written instrument in the following form was executed to appellant, the signature thereto of appellee, S. W. Stewart, appearing as shown below, viz.:
“Van Burén, Arkansas, 12-8-02.
“I hereby guaranty the jack, ‘Cas Miles,’ now at Van Burén, Arkansas, to be good server of mares and a good foal-getter. I further guaranty that he will sire as good crop of mules as any jack now in Arkansas. If he fails to do so, or fails on any of the above guaranty, I agree to refund the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- McMullen v. HoffmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
- Atcheson v. . MallonNew York Court of Appeals · 1870
- Camp v. BruceSupreme Court of Virginia · 1898
- Daniel v. GarnerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1903
- Goble v. O'ConnorNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Peay v. Pulaski CountySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
- Carter v. Bradley County Road Improvement Districts 1 & 2Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
- Eager v. Jonesboro, Lake City & Eastern Express Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
- Meeks v. Arkansas Light & Power Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1921
- Seelbinder v. WitherspoonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1916
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.