Hoobler v. Holder
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
Ed. F. McFaddin, Associate Justice.
This litigation arises because the parties did not have an attorney to prepare their contract for them or to advise them as to the effect of the papers prepared by a layman.
Mr. and Mrs. Holder, appellees, lived in California; they owned real property in Arkansas; Mrs. Holder’s brother acted as their agent in selling the property to Mr. and Mrs. Hoobler, appellants, for $6,000.00. Five hundred dollars was paid in cash and the balance was to be paid monthly. The Hooblers signed the note which Mrs. Holder’s brother had a well meaning laymen prepare, the germane…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- McGuigan v. GainesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1903
- Colovas v. Allen Motor CompanyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1932
- Heisel v. YorkNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1942
- Sosik v. ConlonSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1960
- Runyan v. RunyanIndiana Court of Appeals · 1920
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.