Peay v. Feild
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Pulaski Chancery Court. Hon. W. I. Warwick, Chancellor. Cited Gantt’s Digest, 5233. The statute relates only to persons having control of land. Feilds was discharged by bankruptcy. No lien could thus be acquired on the homestead, by subrogation to the lien of the State. Const, of 1868, art. 12, secs. 2 and 3. Shall had no lien for the two per cent, interest, over statutory rates.
1Opinion of the Court
Walker, J.:
David F. Shall, in his bill of complaint, alleged that as the agent for William H. Feild, he paid the taxes of Feild on certain real and personal property which amounted to the sum of $542.34. The land is described, upon which the taxes were paid, a receipt exhibited showing such payment. That Feild paid him part of the money, leaving a balance due of $302.34 for the payment of which Feild executed to Shall the following note:
“April 1st, 1872. Ninety days after date, I promise to pay to D. F. Shall, or order, $302.34, with interest from date until paid at two per cent, per month…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Belleclair Planting Co. v. HallSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1916
- New York Life Insurance v. NicholSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1926
- Markland v. Merchants' & Farmers' BankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
- Putnam v. SummerlinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1910