Hearin v. Union Sawmill Co.
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Union Chancery Court; J. M. Barker, Chancellor; 1. The contract is controlled by the customs of trade. Parties are presumed to contract with reference to the known customs and usages of trade with reference to the subject-matter of the contract. 9 Cyc. 252; 69 Ark. 317; 10 L. R. A. 735; 80 U. S. 653; Jones on Ev. 576. Proof of custom is admissible to show that “timber” means merchantable timber. 51 So.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Union Chancery Court; J. M. Barker, Chancellor; 1. The contract is controlled by the customs of trade. Parties are presumed to contract with reference to the known customs and usages of trade with reference to the subject-matter of the contract. 9 Cyc. 252; 69 Ark. 317; 10 L. R. A. 735; 80 U. S. 653; Jones on Ev. 576. Proof of custom is admissible to show that “timber” means merchantable timber. 51 So. (Miss.) 3; 138 S. W. 36; 12 Cyc. 1081 (e) and (b); 60 S. E. (Ga.) 297; 49 So. 248. See also 4 Cent. Rep. 689, 6 Atl. 48; 164 Pa. 51; 77 Ark. 120. 2. If it was the specific…
1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.
J. F. and J. C. Hearin were in 1905 the owners of a tract of land in Union County Arkansas, on which grew oak and pine timber. On the 27th day of March, 1905, they conveyed to the Summit Lumber Company, a corporation, “all the pine and oak timber ten inches and up” on said land. Eight years was given in the deed to remove the timber. Subsequently it was discovered by the parties that a mistake had been made in the description of the land, and a new deed was executed on the 19th day of June, 1906, and the timber was again described as “all the pine and oak timber ten inches and up.”
The tract…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Cox v. SmithSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- Boston Store v. SchleuterSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1908
- Delaney v. JacksonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
- Bradley Gin Co. v. J. L. Means Machinery Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
- Cherokee Construction Co. v. Prairie Creek Coal Mining Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
3Cited by5 opinions
- Fullerton v. StorthzSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1930
- Louis Werner Sawmill Co. v. SessomsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
- Eureka Stone Co. v. RoachSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
- Davis v. Martin Stave Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1914
- In Re MartinUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1997