Legal Opinion

Glover v. Bullard

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided January 11, 1926PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Hart, J.,

(after stating the facts.) The chancery-court correctly found that the deed in question should be reformed so as to vest the title in the land in sections 8 and 9 north of Tyronza River, as it actually flows, in the defendant. The undisputed evidence shows that the agent of the defendant represented to the agent of the plaintiffs that the tract of land intended to be sold was situated south qf the Tyronza River as it actually flowed at the time.' The agent of the plaintiffs and of the defendant were on the land at the time, and it was intended by. both parties that only the land…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Drake v. EubanksSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1895
  2. Solmson v. DeeseSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1920
  3. Haynes v. HarperSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1869

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Williams v. J. W. Black Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1982
  2. Lambert v. QuinnCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1990
  3. Hays v. HaysSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1935
  4. Bicknell v. BarnesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1973
  5. Coca-Cola Bott. Co. of Ark. v. Coca-Cola Bott. Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1931

6 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