Hogue v. Jennings
| Decision Date | 03 July 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 5--5961,5--5961 |
| Citation | 481 S.W.2d 752,252 Ark. 1009 |
| Parties | Vernon HOGUE, Appellant, v. Alston JENNINGS, Appellee. |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Rasmussen & Hogue, Hot Springs, for appellant.
Gus B. Walton, Jr., Little Rock, for appellee.
The appellee brought this action against the appellant to recover the balance allegedly due for legal services. The trial court, sitting as a jury, found that the appellant owed the appellee for costs expended in the sum of $1,079.84; that the legal fee of $1,100, $600 of which had been paid, was a reasonable fee for the legal services performed and that a balance of $1,579.84 is owed to appellee. From a judgment on that finding comes this appeal.
Appellant first contends for reversal that the court erred in finding that an account stated ever came into existence. We find no merit in this contention. The factual issues were presented to the court by stipulations. It appears that the legal services were orally agreed upon in 1963 and were concluded in August, 1966. The present action was filed in April, 1970, predicated upon an open account. The appellant responded and interposed the plea that the claim was barred by the 3-year Statute of Limitations. Ark.Stat.Ann. § 37--206 (Repl.1962). Parker v. Carter, 91 Ark. 162, 120 S.W. 836 (1909). In May, 1971, appellee amended his complaint alleging an account stated based upon his mailing to appellant statements concerning the balance owed on the account. These statements of account were dated October, 1967, and January, 1969, respectively. It is undisputed that appellant received these statements and, according to appellee, the appellant orally acknowledged the indebtedness and promised to pay the account as stated.
In Allen-West Commission Company v. Hudgins, 74 Ark. 468, 86 S.W. 289 (1905), we said:
'An account stated 'is an agreement between parties who have had previous transactions of a monetary character that all the items of the account representing such transactions are true, and that the balance struck is correct, together with a promise, express or implied, for the payment of such balance.''
In a more recent case, Boatner v. Gates Bros. Lumber Co., 224 Ark. 494, 275 S.W.2d 627 (1955), the debtor received monthly statements about his consolidated account with the amount or balance reflected upon each statement. There was said:
Likewise, in the case at bar, we hold that an account stated existed. From the stipulations it appears there is undisputed evidence that the appellant received a statement of the balance of the account in October, 1967, and January, 1969. The appellant admits receipt of these two statements and does not deny that he called the appellee by telephone and indicated that he...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bone v. Refco, Inc., s. 84-1519
...true and that the balance struck is correct, together with a promise * * * for the payment of such balance." Hogue v. Jennings, 252 Ark. 1009, 1010, 481 S.W.2d 752, 753 (1972).14 At trial, Refco also took the position that Bone's claim for lost profits had been settled. On this appeal, howe......
-
Northwest Arkansas Recovery Inc. v. Davis
...are true, and that the balance struck is correct, together with a promise for the payment of such balance. Hogue v. Jennings, 252 Ark. 1009, 481 S.W.2d 752 (1972). Conversely, the term "open account" means an account based upon running or concurrent dealings between the parties, which has n......
-
Jernigan v. Cash, 89-29
...merely by observing what was obvious, that the damage to the Honda plainly exceeded the amount of the repair bill. Hogue v. Jennings, 252 Ark. 1009, 481 S.W.2d 752 (1972). I would ...
-
Bates v. Simmons, 75--389
...v. Martin, Phillips & Co., 94 Ark. 365, 126 S.W. 1062; Cole v. Branch & O'Neal, 171 Ark. 611, 285 S.W. 353. See also Hogue v. Jennings, 252 Ark. 1009, 481 S.W.2d 752. Since appellants were seeking a rescission, the parties were entitled to be placed, as nearly as circumstances would permit,......