Legal Opinion

International Harvester Co. of America v. McLaughlin

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided January 19, 1931PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Kirby, J.,

(after stating the facts). It is insisted for appellant that the court erred in refusing to direct a verdict in its favor for the amount of the notes: sued on, and this contention must be sustained.

Appellee admitted the execution of the notes sued on, that appellant was the holder or owner thereof, and that they had not been paid by him. He alleged that the notes had been satisfied in accordance with an agreement made with the agent of appellant to return the machine and equipment purchased, that he had performed this agreement in accordance with its terms by setting aside the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States Bedding Co. v. AndesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
  2. Pierce v. FiorettiSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1919
  3. Rodgers v. PeckhamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  4. J. T. Fargason Co. v. DudleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
  5. Wales-Riggs Plantations v. GroomsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1918

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. CristDistrict Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1987
  2. Albers Milling Co. v. DonaldsonDistrict Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1957
  3. Bridges Asphalt Paving Co. v. National Paving Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1934

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

Powered by the Exa API