Berard v. Fitzpatrick
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Phillips Chancery Court; Edward D. Robertson. Chancellor; 1. Even if we concede tha't the defense that the option contract was executed only as additional security and was discharged by payment of the mortgage debt, yet the court was not warranted from the testimony in making such a finding. .The contract is plain and unambiguous, clear and certain, and parol testimony was not admissible to vary or contradict it. 4 Ark. 183; 15 Id. 543; 24 Id. 210; 29 Id. 544; 35…
Read the full summary
Appeal from Phillips Chancery Court; Edward D. Robertson. Chancellor; 1. Even if we concede tha't the defense that the option contract was executed only as additional security and was discharged by payment of the mortgage debt, yet the court was not warranted from the testimony in making such a finding. .The contract is plain and unambiguous, clear and certain, and parol testimony was not admissible to vary or contradict it. 4 Ark. 183; 15 Id. 543; 24 Id. 210; 29 Id. 544; 35 Id. 156; 24 Id. 269; 25 Id. 191; lb. 309; 99 Id. 218; 105 Id. 50. The testimony was wholly insufficient to overturn the…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
This action was brought by the appellant for the purpose of enforcing the specific performance of a certain option contract entered into between the appellant and appellee for the sale of certain real estate in Phillips County. The lands described in the complaint were .advertised to be sold on January 21, 1916, in satisfaction of a mortgage thereon in favor of a Mrs. Stone. For the purpose of preventing this sale, appellee applied to O. E. Lilly, the agent of the Equitable Security Company, for a loan for the purpose of discharging the indebtedness to Mrs. Stone. It was arranged that a loan…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- James, Holcombe & Rainwater v. FurrSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1916
3Cited by2 opinions
- Gunnels v. MacHenSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1948
- McBride v. McBrideSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1945