Taylor v. Clark
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Garland Chancery Court. 'statement by the court. This is the second appeal in this cause. The opinion- on the first appeal is found at page 612 of 69 Ark., (Clark v. Taylor). where the facts are fully stated.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Garland Chancery Court. 'statement by the court. This is the second appeal in this cause. The opinion- on the first appeal is found at page 612 of 69 Ark., (Clark v. Taylor). where the facts are fully stated. On the former appeal we said: “The questions involved in this case, except as to the rate of interest, seem to have been determined in the recent case of Hale v. Phillips, 68 Ark. 382.” When the cause was tried the last'time, the chancellor found “as a matter of fact that the stock payments made by defendant Mary L. Taylor to plaintiff association were $1,764, of which $882…
1Opinion of the Court
Wood, J.,
(after stating the facts.) Was appellant entitled to credit on her mortgage debt for the sum of $882, the amount paid by her as dues on “premium stock?” is the only question presented by this appeal. The chancery court was correct in its conclusion that, under the decision in Hale v. Phillips, 68 Ark. 382, such credit could not be allowed. The receiver seeks to recover only the amount of the debt or advancement. He does not seek to recover any part of the premium. As was said in State, etc., Association v. Hornbacker, 42 N. J. L. 635 : “The stock is a collateral security for, and not…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hale v. CairnsNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1898
- Hale v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1900
3Cited by7 opinions
- Groover v. Pacific Coast Sav. SocietyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Lacefield v. TaylorSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1932
- Abrams v. Citizens Building & Loan Ass'nSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1916
- Courtney v. ReapSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1931
- Thornton v. AllenSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.