Swaboda v. Throgmorton-Bruce Co.
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Clay iCircuit Court; Frank Smith, Judge; The promise was nothing more than a collateral undertaking. 12 Ark. 174; 70 Id. 79; 3 Bl. Com. (Lewis Ed.), 1x51, note 35; 104 N. W. 1046; 139 N. C. 533.
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, J.
Appellee sued appellant for goods' delivered and charged to one Thurman,' appellant’s tenant. Mr. Throgmorton testified on behalf of appellee that, after he had refused to let Thurman have goods without security, appellant came to the store and told him (witness) “to let Thurman have what goods he wanted, and he would see him paid,” and that “upon Swaboda’s agreement to become surety for Thurman he (witness) advanced to the said Thurman merchandise from time to time” and charged same on the books to Thurman. Another witness testified that he heard appellant tell Throgmorton, in speaking about…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Richardson v. GoddardSupreme Court of the United States · 1860
3Cited by8 opinions
- Millsaps v. NixonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
- Masters v. BidlerOregon Supreme Court · 1921
- Elm Springs State Bank v. BradleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1929
- Forster-Davis Motor Corp. v. AbramsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936
- Vincent v. WessonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1942
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.