Legal Opinion

Burns v. Williams

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided March 7, 1921PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal from Union Chancery Court; J. M. Barker, Chancellor; The master’s report is clearly against the clear preponderance ¡of the evidence, as the deed, though absolute in form, was in fact a mortgage, as the rents did not in fact pay the mortgage debt. No part of the mortgage debt has ever been paid and there is a large balance due Burns. 1. The testimony fails to show that appellant ever made or paid for any improvements or repairs on the land.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Union Chancery Court; J. M. Barker, Chancellor; The master’s report is clearly against the clear preponderance ¡of the evidence, as the deed, though absolute in form, was in fact a mortgage, as the rents did not in fact pay the mortgage debt. No part of the mortgage debt has ever been paid and there is a large balance due Burns. 1. The testimony fails to show that appellant ever made or paid for any improvements or repairs on the land. The deed was a mortgage; this is conceded. 2. The matter of balance due for supplies alleged to have been furnished for 1913 and 1914 was ¡finally…

1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.

Nelson Williams and Hester Williams, his wife, brought this suit in equity against W. A. Burns, Jr., to have a deed, absolute in form, executed by them to Bums, declared a mortgage, and for an accounting by Burns of the rents and profits derived from the land described in the complaint.

Bums defended on the ground that the instrument sued on was an absolute conveyance, and also claimed that, if it should be found by the court to have been intended as a mortgage, he had not received sufficient rents and profits to pay off the mortgage indebtedness.

The land in controversy comprised a farm of 118…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Green v. MaddoxSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
  2. Beasley v. Equitable Securities Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1904
  3. Robertson v. ReadSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1889
  4. McCarron v. CassidySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1856

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Mortimer v. East Side Savings BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API