Dale v. Hall
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Clark Circuit Court. Rufus D. Hearn, Judge. A claim for unliquidated damages cannot be sustained as a set-off to a suit for an accounting of rents by one tenant in common against another. Sand. & H. Dig., § 5917; 61 Ark. 26; 4 id. 527; 54 id. 187, 190; 118 111. 403; 9 N. E. Rep. 201. If sustained at all, it must be as a counter-claim under § 5723, Sand. & H. Dig. But it did not arise out of the contract or transaction sued on. Tied. Real.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Clark Circuit Court. Rufus D. Hearn, Judge. A claim for unliquidated damages cannot be sustained as a set-off to a suit for an accounting of rents by one tenant in common against another. Sand. & H. Dig., § 5917; 61 Ark. 26; 4 id. 527; 54 id. 187, 190; 118 111. 403; 9 N. E. Rep. 201. If sustained at all, it must be as a counter-claim under § 5723, Sand. & H. Dig. But it did not arise out of the contract or transaction sued on. Tied. Real. Pr. §§ 651, 652; 29 Minn. 95; 12 N. W. Rep. 149; 34 Pac. Rep. 90, 92; 148 N. Y. 463; 42 N. E. Rep. 1048; 68 Vt. 219; 33 L. R. An. 225; 11 id.…
1Opinion of the Court
Bunn, 0. J.
The appellee, E. M. Hall, was the owner of an undivided half interest in certain lots in the city of Arkadelphia, and other-persons, previously to the first of February, 1894, were the owners of the other half interest, when they sold and conveyed their iinterest to appellant, J. R. Dalfe. Before and up to this time, there had been an arrangement between the tenants in common that Hall should have the man-, agement and control of the renting of the lots, and should collect the rents for the benefit of all; and under this arrangement, about the latter part of December, 1893, and the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Mason v. FunderburkSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1969
- Mahoney v. RobertsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1908
- Hogue v. SparksSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1920
- Neely v. WilmoreSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1916