West-Winfree Tobacco Co. v. Waller

51 S.W. 320, 66 Ark. 445, 1899 Ark. LEXIS 133
Supreme Court of Arkansas·Decided May 6, 1899·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Hughes, J.,

(after stating the facts.) There is no ambiguity in the meaning of the note guarantied by the appellees, and its proper construction was that asked to be placed upon it in the fourth instruction asked for by the plaintiff, which the court refused to give, and in so doing committed error, in our opinion.

The testimony of Waller and of Couey was incompetent, and the court erred in admitting it. It tended to contradict or vary the terms of an unambiguous written contract.

For the errors indicated the judgment is reversed, and judgment is ordered to be rendered below for plaintiff, for which purpose let the case be remanded.

Bunn, C. J., and Battle, J., not sitting.

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

West-Winfree Tobacco Co. v. Waller, 51 S.W. 320, 66 Ark. 445, 1899 Ark. LEXIS 133 (Ark. 1899).

51 S.W. 320 (West-Winfree Tobacco Co. v. Waller) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Webb
182 S.W.2d 941 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1944)
Tillar v. Wilson
96 S.W. 381 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1906)