Hightower v. Nuber
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Sebastian Circuit Court. Hon. E. D. Ham, Circuit Judge. The denial in the answer of appellant threw the burthen of proof upon the appellee; Greenl.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Sebastian Circuit Court. Hon. E. D. Ham, Circuit Judge. The denial in the answer of appellant threw the burthen of proof upon the appellee; Greenl. Ev. 838, Sec. 860. The presumption of law is in favor of soundness of mind; 8d Kent, 668. Mere mental imbecility is not sufficient, there must be a total loss of the reasoning faculties, to avoid a deed or contract; 8d Kent, 564■; Bambean v. Brant, 17 How., J3; 81 Curtis, 854. Nor will inadequacy of consideration avoid a deed; lb. A voluntary or fraudulent, and even voidable deed, may become .good by matter ex post facto; 4 Kent,511;…
1Opinion of the CourtGrRBGG, J.
In November, 1869, the appellee commenced bis suit, in equity, in the Sebastian circuit court against the appellants, J oseph S. 0. Roland and his wife J osephine, to cancel a deed by him made to the defendant, Mary Jane Hightower, under which she claimed title to lot 7, in block 7, in the city of Fort Smith, and to have possession thereof delivered to him ; alleging that said Rolands were in actual possession as tenants under the Hightowers, and that the deed, executed to said Mary Jane, was obtained through fraud and deception, and without any consideration. That from long and severe…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Health Betterment Foundation v. ThomasSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1955
- Duncan v. HensleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1970
- Brimson v. PearrowSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1950
- Gonzales v. TuckerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
- Wilson v. WilsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1947
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.