Ferrell v. Wood
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from St. Francis Circuit Court; J. M. Jackson, Judge; Crawford & Moses’ Digest, § 5542, does not apply to an executory contract for a future sale of a homestead, but only to formal instruments which pass some title to the homestead at the time .of execution. Conveyances and mortgages are specifically set out, and the general words, “or other instruments,” calls for the application of the doctrine of “ejusdem, generis.”
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Francis Circuit Court; J. M. Jackson, Judge; Crawford & Moses’ Digest, § 5542, does not apply to an executory contract for a future sale of a homestead, but only to formal instruments which pass some title to the homestead at the time .of execution. Conveyances and mortgages are specifically set out, and the general words, “or other instruments,” calls for the application of the doctrine of “ejusdem, generis.” It is an old and settled rule of statutory construction which confines the meaning of additional and general descriptive words to the class to which the preceding…
1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.
H. A. Ferrell made a contract in writing with Fletcher Wood to purchase the homestead of the latter. Wood’s wife did not sign the contract. Upon the refusal of Wood to carry out the contract, Ferrell instituted this suit in the circuit court against him to recover damages.
The judgment of the circuit court was in favor of Wood, and Ferrell has appealed.
A majority .of the court is of the opinion that the .judgment of the circuit court was correct. This court has uniformly held that, under our statute, a deed or mortgage purporting to convey the homestead by a married man is void unless his wife…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Pipkin v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1893
- Weitzner v. ThingstadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Branch v. MooreSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1907
- Oliver v. RouthSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1916
- Waters v. HanleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Ray v. American National Bank & Trust Co. of SapulpaSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1994
- Hall v. MitchellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
- Strahan v. HaynesArizona Supreme Court · 1928
- Penney v. VessellsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1952
- Williams v. CourtonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1926
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.