Legal Opinion · Dissent

Arkansas Industrial Development Commission v. FABCO of Ashdown, Inc.

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided February 8, 1993No. 92-34Published

1DissentRobert L. Brown, Justice

In this decision, the majority has swept aside decades law on the discharge of a guarantor’s obligation. The majority, first, has obliterated the requirement that a determination of material alteration must be made prior to discharge. But the decision also affirms the placement of the burden of proof on what Arkansas cases and American Jurisprudence have long held to be the wrong party. As this is an appeal from a summary judgment, I would reverse and remand this case so that proof of material alteration could be presented by the guarantors and the issue resolved.

Initially, this decision…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Van Balen v. Peoples Bank & Trust Co.Court of Appeals of Arkansas · 1981
  2. Inter-Sport, Inc. v. WilsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1983
  3. Vogel v. Simmons First National Bank of Pine BluffCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1985
  4. Wynne, Love & Co. v. BunchSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
  5. Continental Ozark, Inc. v. LairCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1989

4 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