Neal v. Cole
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Polk Circuit Court; George R. Haynie, Judge ou exchange; 1. The verdict is contrary to the evidence. The value of the property taken was placed at $483. This value is not sustained by the evidence. The verdict is excessive. 2. The court erred in refusing the instructions asked by appellant. They were proper under the facts of this case.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Polk Circuit Court; George R. Haynie, Judge ou exchange; 1. The verdict is contrary to the evidence. The value of the property taken was placed at $483. This value is not sustained by the evidence. The verdict is excessive. 2. The court erred in refusing the instructions asked by appellant. They were proper under the facts of this case. Kirby’s Dig., § 6196; 34 Ark. 257. 1. The motion for a new trial does not assign that the verdict was excessive, and hence we do not discuss the value, of the property. A new trial was not asked on the ground that the verdict was excessive. 75 Ark.…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
Appellant sold appellee a wagon and team and harness for $367.50, and in payment therefor took his note due and payable November 15, 1919, and to secure the payment of this note, with the interest thereon, took a chattel mortgage on the property sold and four head of cattle which appellee already owned. On July 19, 1919, appellant brought replevin for this property, alleging waste upon the part of appellee and depreciation of the security. The property was taken under the order of delivery and sold by appellant under the power contained in the mortgage to several different purchasers.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hobbs v. ClarkSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1890
3Cited by1 opinion
- Taylor v. WalkerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1921