Legal Opinion

Union Saw Mill Co. v. Agerton

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided March 3, 1930PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Hart, C. J.,

(after stating the facts). It is earnestly insisted that the judgment should be reversed because the evidence is not legally sufficient to support the verdict. In making this contention, counsel for the defendant insist that the timber was cut and removed within a reasonable' time by the defendant. The record shows that the defendant was the original owner of the land and conveyed it by warranty deed to Henry F. Murray on the 20th day of December, 1906. In the deed, the defendant reserved to itself the timber on the land, with the right of ingress and egress to its employees and…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Earl v. HarrisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
  2. Burbridge v. Arkansas Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
  3. Ozan-Graysonia Lumber Company v. SwearingenSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1925
  4. Young v. CowanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1918
  5. Orr v. Southern Lumber CompanySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1926

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Rayburn Et Ux. v. Crawford Et Ux.Oregon Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Emerson v. HOOD RIVER COUNTYOregon Supreme Court · 1960
  3. Emerson v. HOOD RIVER COUNTYOregon Supreme Court · 1960
  4. Hughes v. Heppner Lumber Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1955

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

Powered by the Exa API