Walker v. Mathis
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from White Chancery Court; John E. Marr tineau, Chancellor; 1. Mathis voluntarily assumed the payment of the Neal notes to Vincent, which are not yet due. He is not the grantee of Walker.
Read the full summary
Appeal from White Chancery Court; John E. Marr tineau, Chancellor; 1. Mathis voluntarily assumed the payment of the Neal notes to Vincent, which are not yet due. He is not the grantee of Walker. No personal judgment should have been rendered against him. 46 Ark. 132; 31 Id. 155; lb. 411; 49 Id. 457; 51 Id. 205; 64 Id. 627; 85 Id. 59. Mathis was not a party to the contract. 9 Cyc. 380; 6 R. C. L., § § 274-5; 65 Ark. 29. See also 65 Ark. 29, 30; 86 Id. 218; 101 Id. 226; 110 Id. 589; 122 Id. 414. 2. There was no privity of contract between the parties. Bouvier’s Law Diet., Vol. 3, p. 2722; 3…
1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.
On the 18th day of June, 1910, J. H. Vincent executed a mortgage on two forty-acre tracts of land adjoining each other in White County, Arkansas, to the New England Securities Company for the sum of $300 with certain interest coupons. On the 8th day of November, 1912, J. H. Vincent conveyed the north forty acres to Z. M. Walker, for the consideration of $100 cash in hand paid, and the further sum of $300 for which vendor’s lien was retained to be paid to the New England Securities Company on December 1,1914. On the 28th day of October, 1913, Z. M. Walker and wife conveyed this tract of land…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Felker v. RiceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1913
3Cited by11 opinions
- McCown v. NicksSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1926
- Trent v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1932
- Barlow v. CainSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1920
- Wallace v. HammondsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1926
- Beard v. BeardSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1921
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.