Garner v. Wright
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Sebastian Circuit Court. John S. Little, Judge. 1. As there is no lex loci contractus to govern this case, the parties having invoked the aid of our courts, the lex fori, the common law, should govern. See 18 How., 100; 4 id., 367; 14 Otto, 621; 116 U. S., 28; 12 Otto, 143; Vattel (Chitty’s 4th Am. ed.),sec. 107; Story Conf. Laws (3th ed.), pp. ¿¡21-2; 1 Kent Com., *pp. 243, 473, note a; 1 Sharsw.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Sebastian Circuit Court. John S. Little, Judge. 1. As there is no lex loci contractus to govern this case, the parties having invoked the aid of our courts, the lex fori, the common law, should govern. See 18 How., 100; 4 id., 367; 14 Otto, 621; 116 U. S., 28; 12 Otto, 143; Vattel (Chitty’s 4th Am. ed.),sec. 107; Story Conf. Laws (3th ed.), pp. ¿¡21-2; 1 Kent Com., *pp. 243, 473, note a; 1 Sharsw. Blackst. *p. 108, note 11; 6 N. J. L., 1; 1 Dali., 374; 1 Dali., {Pa.) 64; 3 Peters, 233; 3 Oh. St., 172; 2' Oh. St., 387; 43 Miss., 397; 2 Ark., 198; Mansf. Dig., sec. 366; 33 Miss.,…
1Opinion of the CourtHemingway, J.
The appellant, Garner, and one Brown, white men, and citizens of the United States, resided in the Indian Territory. On the 19th of January, 1886, Brown there executed a mortgage to Garner, whereby he conveyed to him certain chattels, including the horse and wagon in controversy, as security for a debt.
The mortgage provided that Garner should have possession and control of the mortgaged chattels. They were accordingly delivered to him and remained in his sole possession for more than a month, when Brown borrowed them to use in hauling wood. He used them during ten days, but at night returned…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Cameron, Hull & Co. v. MarvinSupreme Court of Kansas · 1881
- Hutton v. ArnettIllinois Supreme Court · 1869
- Farnsworth v. ShepardSupreme Court of Vermont · 1834
3Cited by14 opinions
- E. B. Hayes Machinery Co. v. EasthamSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1920
- Mathieson v. St. Louis & San Francisco RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1909
- Frick Co. v. OatsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
- Kennebrew v. Southern Automatic Electric Shock Machine Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1894
- Brown v. WrightSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1893
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.