Legal Opinion
Wm. R. Moore Dry Goods Co. v. Ford
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Decided November 22, 1920PublishedCited by 7 opinions
Appeal from Lafayette Chancery Court; James M. Barker, Chancellor; The chancery court erred in sustaining the demurrer and redering judgment against appellants. The appellants stated a cause of action and it was error to sustain the demurrer. Courts of - equity can tell molasses from whiskey and can see fraud. The individual members of the firm of Ford & Wheeler did not obtain a discharge in bankruptcy from their individual debts and were liable for their individual debts. .
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
Appellants filed in the Lafayette Chancery Court the following complaint:
“In the Lafayette Chancery Court. Wm. R. Moore Dry Goods Company and Stephen Putney Shoe Company, Plaintiffs, v. W. H. Ford and Mrs. Alta M. Ford, Defendants. Nos. 1614, 1635.
“COMPLAINT..
“1. The plaintiff, Wm. R. Moore Dry Goods Company, a corporation organized under the laws of Tennessee, doing business at Memphis, Tennessee, states that on the 28th day of April, 1916, it filed a suit in this court against the defendant, No. 1614, to subject their property to a judgment in the Lafayette Circuit Court, rendered on…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Francis v. McNealSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Horner v. HamnerCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1918
- Armstrong v. NorrisCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1917
- Citizens Bank v. Commercial National BankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1913
3Cited by7 opinions
- Strode v. HollandSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1921
- Miller, Trustee v. Maryland Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1944
- Curlee Clothing Co. v. HammSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
- Sternberg v. StrongSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
- Missouri Pacific Railroad v. BrewerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1922
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.