Fagan v. Graves
Supreme Court of Arkansas
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
- McGuigan v. GainesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1903
- Welch v. WelchSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1918
- Eureka Stone Co. v. RoachSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
- Cain v. CollierSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1918
- Norsworthy v. HicksSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1926
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Fullerton v. StorthzSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1930
- Weiss v. TurneyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1949
- Barton-Mansfield Company v. WellsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1931
- Minus v. MinusCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1998
- City of Ft. Smith v. FranceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1962