Mays v. Barnett
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Searcy Chancery Court; B. F. Mc-Mahan, Chancellor; The parties are bound by the written contract. All previous conversations and understandings merged into and became a part of the written contract and can not be varied by parol testimony. 99 Ark. 218; 93 Ark. 371; 133 Ark. 112; 120 Ark. 368; 135 Ark. 38. The finding of the chancellor is not supported by the evidence. The contract is plain and needs no parol testimony for the purpose of explaining it.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Searcy Chancery Court; B. F. Mc-Mahan, Chancellor; The parties are bound by the written contract. All previous conversations and understandings merged into and became a part of the written contract and can not be varied by parol testimony. 99 Ark. 218; 93 Ark. 371; 133 Ark. 112; 120 Ark. 368; 135 Ark. 38. The finding of the chancellor is not supported by the evidence. The contract is plain and needs no parol testimony for the purpose of explaining it. The words in parenthesis simply meant to limit the fixtures and transformers to those in use at the poles, between the poles and…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
Appellee Barnett instituted two suits against appellant Mays (who was doing business .under the name of Mays Manufacturing Company and will be hereinafter referred to as Mays), which were consolidated and tried as a single suit. The first was a suit in replevin for a street light serial and a switch board of the value of $345. The second suit was one to recover the value of certain electric light poles and certain fixtures, tools, and other appliances which had been used in connection with the electric light plant in the city of Leslie, Arkansas, which Barnett claimed he had bought from Mays,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Wood v. KelseySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- Arlington Hotel Co. v. RectorSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1916
- Boden v. MaherWisconsin Supreme Court · 1900
- Brown & Hackney v. DaubsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1919
- Ellege v. HendersonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1920
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Ben F. Levis, Inc. v. CollinsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1949
- Harris v. Stephens Production Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1992
- Wisconsin & Arkansas Lumber Co. v. FitzhughSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1921
- Bynum v. Jos. E. Seagram & Sons, Inc.District Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1950