Tyson v. Horsley
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from St. Francis Circuit Court; R. J. Williams, Special Judge; 1. The court erred in its oral instructions. The undertaking to pay John Elby’s debt was an original one and based upon a new and original consideration, taking it out of the statute of frauds.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Francis Circuit Court; R. J. Williams, Special Judge; 1. The court erred in its oral instructions. The undertaking to pay John Elby’s debt was an original one and based upon a new and original consideration, taking it out of the statute of frauds. An agreement not to exercise a legal right is a valid consideration to support a contract. 110 Ark. 327; 45 Id. 67; 76 Id. 292; Ib. 1; 106 Id. 465; 96 Id. 46. 2. The court erred in giving plaintiff’s instruction No. 1. Cases supra. 3. The court erred in refusing No. 2 for defendant, also No. 1 for defendant. There was no testimony to…
1Opinion of the CourtWood, J.
This action was brought by the appellee against the appellant on an account which was itemized, in which the appellee claimed that appellant was due him the sum of $968.45.
Appellant answered denying liability. He alleged that the appellee was indebted to him in the sum of $934 on an account which he had against one John Elby, which he alleged that the appellee, in writing, for valuable consideration, agreed to pay.
The appellee replied denying that he was liable to the appellant for the Elby account and denying that he had promised to pay the same in writing. He, therefore, expressly pleaded…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Jonesboro Hardware Co. v. Western Tie & Timber Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1918
3Cited by3 opinions
- Fausett Co. v. RandCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1981
- Hunt v. TaggettSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
- Hunt v. TaggettSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923