Legal Opinion

Matthews v. Stevens

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided March 10, 1924PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Hart, J.,

(after stating the facts). It is well settled in this State that whenever, at the time of a sale, a vendor is indebted to the purchaser, and continues to be indebted after the sale, with the right to call for a reconveyance upon payment of the debt, a deed absolute on its face will be considered by a court of equity as a mortgage.Harman v. May, 40 Ark. 146, and Brewer v. Yancey, 159 Ark. 256.'

The effect of our decisions is that, whether any particular transaction does thus amount to a mortgage or to a sale with a contract of repurchase must, to a large extent, depend upon its own…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hays v. EmersonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
  2. Snell v. WhiteSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1918
  3. Jefferson v. SouterSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1921
  4. Cold v. BehSupreme Court of Iowa · 1911
  5. Harman v. MaySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1882

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Kerby v. FieldSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1931
  2. Newport v. ChandlerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1944
  3. Clark-Mcwilliams Coal Co. v. WardSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1932
  4. Parmenter v. KellisCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1941
  5. Sturgis v. HughesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1944

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API