Legal Opinion

Batton v. Jones

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided February 23, 1925PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Hart, J.,

(after stating the facts). It is earnestly insisted by counsel for the defendant that the judgment should be reversed, because the weight of the evidence showed that, under the custom of the country, the words, “subject to the-usual overflow clause,” meant that, in case the land was overflowed, the tenant would pay a part of the crop for rent on the overflowed land and the average price per acre in cash for the land that was not overflowed.

It does not make any difference where the weight of the evidence on this point was. It is sufficient to say that there was testimony on the part…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. EllenwoodSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1916
  2. Southern Coal Co. v. Searcy Transfer Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1922

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Farmers Cooperative Association v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1968
  2. Ozark-Badger Company v. RobertsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1926
  3. Venturi, Inc. v. AdkissonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1977
  4. Murdock v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1929
  5. National Lumber & Creosoting Co. v. MullinsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1933

1 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