Hall v. Huff
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Garland Chancery Court; S. W. Leslie, Special Chancellor; 1. One who comes into a court of equity must do so with clean hands. An administrator can not purchase at his own sale. 27 Ark. 637; 55 Id. 85; 33 Id. 575; 34 Id. 63; 46 Id. 451; 58 Id. 84. 2. An administrator and his attorney can not buy claims against the estate. 40 Ark. 393. 3. His hands must be clean. He is a trustee. 7 Ark. 516-19; 33 Id. 294; 53 Id. 150; 47 Id. 311.
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, C. J.
This is an action instituted by the plaintiff, C. Floyd Huff, against the defendant, J. H. Hall, to recover possession of an undivided one-third of a certain tract or lot of real estate in the city of Hot Springs, described as lot 1, of block 60, of the city of Hot Springs, as platted by tbe United States Hot Springs-Commission, and also to recover one-third of the rents and profits of said property.
Defendant demurred to tbe complaint, but it does not appear tbat tbe court ever ruled on tbe demurrer, and the defendant filed an answer, and also a cross-complaint, in wbicb be asked tbat bis…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Kansas City, Fort Scott & Memphis Railroad v. JoslinSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Rachels v. Doniphan Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
3Cited by7 opinions
- Fulcher v. Dierks Lumber & Coal Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1924
- Askew v. Murdock Acceptance CorporationSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1955
- St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. Kirtley & GulleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
- St. Paul-Mercury Indemnity Co. v. City of HughesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1960
- Hall v. HuffSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1916
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.