Legal Opinion

Fagan v. Graves

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided April 25, 1927PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Kirby, J.,

(after stating the facts). The rule of evidence is different, requiring more proof than the establishment of the contention by a preponderance of the testimony in order to justify the reformation of a deed "or written instrument on the ground of mistake. In Eureka Stone Co. v. Roach, 120 Ark. 326, 179 S. W. 499, the court said: “It is the settled rule of this court that, to justify or authorize the reformation of a written instrument on the ground of fraud or mistake, the eyi-dence of such fraud or mistake must be clear, unequivocal and decisive.” See also Cain v. Collier, 135 Ark.…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. McGuigan v. GainesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1903
  2. Welch v. WelchSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1918
  3. Eureka Stone Co. v. RoachSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
  4. Cain v. CollierSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1918
  5. Norsworthy v. HicksSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1926

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Fullerton v. StorthzSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1930
  2. Weiss v. TurneyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1949
  3. Barton-Mansfield Company v. WellsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1931
  4. Minus v. MinusCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1998
  5. City of Ft. Smith v. FranceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1962

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API