Miles F. Bixler Co. v. J. K. Hall Lumber Co.
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Hot Spring Circuit Court; Scott Wood, Judge on exchange; 1. No fraudulent representations were made or proven. The statements of the agent were expressions of opinion and not fraudulent. 84 Atl. 146; 5 N. W. 736; 37 So. 422; 112 111. App. 329; 160 Pac. 495; 157 Id. 941; 88 S. E. 348; 143 Pac. 998; 14 Ga.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Hot Spring Circuit Court; Scott Wood, Judge on exchange; 1. No fraudulent representations were made or proven. The statements of the agent were expressions of opinion and not fraudulent. 84 Atl. 146; 5 N. W. 736; 37 So. 422; 112 111. App. 329; 160 Pac. 495; 157 Id. 941; 88 S. E. 348; 143 Pac. 998; 14 Ga. App. 803; 88 S. E. 355; 33 111. 354; 93 Iiid. 276; 124 Ark. 555; 86 111. 125; 197 111. App. 101; 95 Ark. 131; 31 Id. 170; 15 L. R. A. (N. S.) 409; 86 111. 125. 2. The goods were sold under a written contract and the purchaser got exactly what he ordered. There was no fraud, and…
1Opinion of the Court
HART, J.,
(after stating the facts). It is insisted by counsel for appellant that the court erred for two reasons, in refusing to direct a verdict in its favor.
First, it is insisted that the evidence does not establish fraud in the procurement of the contract and that by its terms, appellee was required to exchange articles which proved >to be unsatisfactory before he could defend a' suit for the purchase price for failure of consideration. It appears from the record that appellant was engaged in manufacturing jewelry and selling it to its customers from samples carried along by its traveling…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Main v. DearingSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- American Standard Jewelry Co. v. HillSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- Iowa City State Bank v. BiggadikeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1917
3Cited by2 opinions
- Thayer v. City of St. JosephMissouri Court of Appeals · 1932
- Jones v. Model LaundrySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1929