Reavis v. Barnes

36 Ark. 575
CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas
DecidedNovember 15, 1880
StatusPublished
Cited by17 cases

This text of 36 Ark. 575 (Reavis v. Barnes) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Reavis v. Barnes, 36 Ark. 575 (Ark. 1880).

Opinion

Harrison, J.

Although the defendant when he bought the cotton from Kirby may have known of the plaintiff’s lien for rent, the property in it passed to him, and the money for which he sold it, as a matter of course, belonged to him.

The ground of the action for money had and received by the defendant for the use of the plaintiff is, that the defendant had received money for the benefit of the plaintiff under such circumstances as to create a privity of contract between him and the plaintiff. 2 Chit. Con, 899.

Had the cotton been tortiously taken, the money for which the defendant sold it, would have been received by him for the use of Kirby, and not for the plaintiff.

The plaintiff’s only remedy against the defendant, if under the circumstances he was entitled to any, was by specific attachment whilst it remained in the defendant’s possession, or after the sale of it, by suit in equity for the payment of the rent out of the proceeds.

The judgment is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Tarheel Drilling & Equipment Co. v. Valley Steel Products Co.
330 S.W.2d 717 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1960)
McKay v. Millner
183 S.W.2d 780 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1944)
Bank of Marion v. Beck
136 S.W.2d 188 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1940)
Clemmons v. Byars
122 S.W.2d 652 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1938)
Lee v. Wagner
47 S.W.2d 33 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1932)
Rose City Mercantile Company v. Miller
286 S.W. 1010 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1926)
Nohrnberg v. Boley
246 P. 12 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1925)
Gould-Galbraith Supply Co. v. Triplett
266 S.W. 937 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1924)
Bank of Commerce v. Tubb
247 S.W. 1079 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1923)
Security Bank & Trust Co. v. Bond
201 S.W. 820 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1918)
Imperial Valley Savings Bank v. Huff
190 S.W. 116 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1916)
Manilla Supply Co. v. Tiger Bros.
189 S.W. 675 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1916)
Murphy v. Myar
128 S.W. 359 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1910)
Beebe Stave Co. v. Austin
122 S.W. 482 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1909)
Ferniman v. Nowlin
120 S.W. 378 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1909)
Barrett v. Nichols
107 S.W. 171 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1908)
Judge v. Curtis
78 S.W. 746 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1904)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
36 Ark. 575, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reavis-v-barnes-ark-1880.