Legal Opinion

Hufsmith v. Weaver

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided April 8, 1985No. 84-263PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

David Newbern, Justice.

In this action for tortious interference with a contract, a summary judgment was entered in favor of the defendants who are now the appellees. The appellant, Hufsmith, was not a party to the contract which was allegedly subverted by the appellees. Rather, he based his standing to sue on his position as a third party creditor beneficiary. The trial judge held the allegations of the complaint were insufficient to sustain the contention that the appellant was a third party creditor beneficiary. To that we add that there was no remaining genuine issue of material fact, as…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Eastern Railroad Presidents Conference v. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
  2. United Mine Workers v. PenningtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  3. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1968
  4. Joey Brown Interest, Inc. v. Merchants National BankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1985
  5. Wilson v. General Mortgage Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1982

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Farm Bureau Insurance Co. of Arkansas, Inc. v. Running M Farms, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 2006
  2. Hufsmith v. WeaverCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1987
  3. Grand Valley Ridge, LLC v. Metropolitan National BankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2012
  4. 400 Walnut Associates, L.P. v. 4th Walnut Associates L.P. (In re 400 Walnut Associates, L.P.)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2014
  5. Johnson v. Ryder Truck Rentals, Inc.District Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1988

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

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

Powered by the Exa API