Claypool v. Johnston
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Logan Chancery ¡Court, Northern District; /. Virgil Bourlmdj Chancellor; 1. The court’s finding that the trees were worth only 50 cents each is not in accord with proof. By the decided weight of the testimony they were worth at least $1.00 each. His finding is persuasive only. 41 Ark. 294; 75 Ark. 75. 2. It was the master’s duty under the order of reference, and so understood by the parties, to take testimony and ascertain and report the value of the trees.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Logan Chancery ¡Court, Northern District; /. Virgil Bourlmdj Chancellor; 1. The court’s finding that the trees were worth only 50 cents each is not in accord with proof. By the decided weight of the testimony they were worth at least $1.00 each. His finding is persuasive only. 41 Ark. 294; 75 Ark. 75. 2. It was the master’s duty under the order of reference, and so understood by the parties, to take testimony and ascertain and report the value of the trees. The decree overruling the master’s finding that their value was 75 cents each, was a mere difference of opinion of the…
1Opinion of the CourtFraurnthar, J.
The plaintiff below, Frank L. Johnston, instituted this suit against the defendant, J. C. Claypool, seeking to recover upon a note given for the balance of the purchase money of certain land. The defendant admitted the purchase of the land and the execution of the note, but alleged that the plaintiff had fraudulently induced him to purchase the land by falsely representing that at the time of the purchase there were 2,500 healthy bearing apple trees upon the land. He sought a recoupment by reason of the false representations or a rescission of the contract of sale. Upon a trial of the cause…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Kimberly v. ArmsSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Davis v. SchwartzSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Greer v. FontaineSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1903
- Hinkle v. BroadwaterSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Brown v. Wyandotte & Southeastern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1900
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Red Bud Realty Co. v. SouthSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
- Chicago Mill & Lumber Co. v. Osceola Land Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
- Crill v. TritesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1932
- McDonald v. KenneySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- Scroggy v. KelleySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.