Dewberry v. Furst & Thomas
Supreme Court of Arkansas
'Appeal from White Circuit Court; J. M. Jackson, Judge; 1. There are three reasons for reversal, because (1) the court erred in refusing to permit defendants to testify as to the rescission of the original contract between plaintiffs and defendants, (2) the court erred in its instruction on that question, and (3) the verdict was contrary to the law in that it found for no specified amount.
Read the full summary
'Appeal from White Circuit Court; J. M. Jackson, Judge; 1. There are three reasons for reversal, because (1) the court erred in refusing to permit defendants to testify as to the rescission of the original contract between plaintiffs and defendants, (2) the court erred in its instruction on that question, and (3) the verdict was contrary to the law in that it found for no specified amount. The contract had been rescinded by another contract between the same parties after Dewberry became in ill health and unable to continue the work and plaintiffs agreed to secure a new man who would give…
1Opinion of the CourtWood, J.
The appellees, a partnership doing business at Freeport, Illinois, entered into a contract with W. A. Dewberry of Searcy, Arkansas, by which' the appellees sold to Dewberry certain merchandise on credit. Dewberry entered into a contract of guaranty with the appellees for the performance of the contract on his part, which contract of guaranty was signed by W. C. Sneed, J. A. Yerner, and-Theo. Phillips, the other appellants. Dewberry’s health failed, and he terminated the contract in July, 1915. He had on hand at that time merchandise of the value of $169.19. The appellees credited him with the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Von Berg v. GoodmanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1908
- Brickey v. Continental Gin Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1914
3Cited by1 opinion
- National Loan & Exchange Bank v. TolbertSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1924