El Dorado Ice & Planing Mill Co. v. Kinard
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Union Circuit Court; George W. Hays, Judge; The -contract, by reason of its lack of mutuality in the corresponding undertakings of the parties, is unenforeible. 64 Ark. 398; 93 Mich. 491; 29 Am. Rep. 530; 7 Am. & Eng. Enc. of E. (2 ed.), 114; 90 Ark. 509. The contract is mutual.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Union Circuit Court; George W. Hays, Judge; The -contract, by reason of its lack of mutuality in the corresponding undertakings of the parties, is unenforeible. 64 Ark. 398; 93 Mich. 491; 29 Am. Rep. 530; 7 Am. & Eng. Enc. of E. (2 ed.), 114; 90 Ark. 509. The contract is mutual. It is an obligation upon appellee to secure the entire cut of a mill of a specified grade of lumber for a certain period and to deliver it, or have it delivered f. o. b. cars at any point not -over fifteen miles from El Dorado, and the -correlative and reciprocal obligation on the part of appellant to…
1Opinion of the CourtFrauenthal, J.
This was an action instituted by the appellee to recover damages for the alleged breach of a contract for the purchase of lumber manufactured by appellee. The appellant, the El Dorado Ice & Planing Mill Company, was the owner of a planing mill situated in El Dorado, Arkansas, and on June 10, 1907, it made the following written contract with appellee:
“This contract and agreement, made and entered into this 10th day of June, 1907, by and between the El Dorado Ice & Planing Mill Company and J. L. Kinard, both of El Dorado, Arkansas, witnesses that the El Dorado Ice & Planing Mill Company bind…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Crane v. . PowellNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Lewis v. Atlas Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1876
- Fontaine v. Baxley, Boles & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1892
- St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. RogersSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
- Bloom v. Home Insurance AgencySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Showmethemoney Check Cashers, Inc. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2000
- Roessler v. BurwellSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1934
- Acme Cigarette Services, Inc. v. GallegosNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1978
- Marcrum v. EmbrySupreme Court of Alabama · 1973
- Lindner v. Mid-Continent Petroleum Corp.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1952
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.