Martin v. Hickman

• Decision Date: 19 June 1897
• Citation: 41 S.W. 852
• Parties: MARTIN v. HICKMAN.
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

41 S.W. 852

MARTIN v. HICKMAN.

Supreme Court of Arkansas.

June 19, 1897.

Appeal from circuit court, Bradley county; Marcus L. Hawkins, Judge.

Action by W. J. Hickman against W. A. Martin. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed.

This action was brought by Hickman against Martin, to recover the sum of $147. The circumstances out of which the action arose were, briefly, as follows: Martin, being the owner of a house and lot in the town of Warren, contracted to sell and convey it to O'Neill, for the sum of $230. O'Neill took possession of the property under the contract of sale, and paid $85 upon the price, leaving due a balance of $145. O'Neill, after holding the property a year or two, sold his interest therein to appellee, Hickman, who, as a consideration therefor, assumed the payment of the $145 balance due from O'Neill to Martin, and also agreed to pay O'Neill the further sum of $147, making in all the sum of $292 which he was to pay for the property. Hickman held the property a while, and then offered to sell the property back to Martin. They failed to agree upon a price at that time, but set another day on which they were to meet, and endeavor to agree upon a trade. Before the arrival of the day named, Martin was called to St. Louis on business, and, finding that he could not meet Hickman on the day named, he authorized Julius Clary to offer Hickman $75 for the possession of the place, and for all his right and interest thereto. Clary met Hickman, paid him $75 as directed, and took from him a writing in the following words: "Warren, Ark., Mar. 3rd, 1891. I, W. J. Hickman, do hereby quit all my claim to the place once owned by Alfred Martin, purchased by J. S. O'Neill, and then to me, the undersigned, for which I have received pay in full by J. C. Clary, as the representative of the said Alfred Martin, to do as he pleases with the same. [Signed] W. J. Hickman." Under this writing, Martin took possession of the place, and soon afterwards sold it to a third party. Some 18 months afterwards Martin was first informed that Hickman claimed that Clary, in the trade for the property, had agreed that he (Martin), as part of the consideration therefor, would pay the $147 which Hickman had agreed to pay O'Neill. Martin at once denied that he had authorized Clary to make such an agreement, and refused to be bound by it. On the trial, Hickman admitted that he had never, in his negotiations with Martin, mentioned this note for $147, which he owed O'Neill, but stated that he did mention it to Clary; that he gave the writing, and delivered possession of the place, upon the agreement had with Clary that Martin should assume and pay the O'Neill note for $147, and supposed that Martin had paid it until long afterwards. Clary, who testified for the defendant, Martin, denied that he had made such agreement, or that anything was said about such note by Hickman, and further testified that he had never heard of the existence of such a note until about a year and a half after the note was made. There were a verdict and judgment for plaintiff.

Wells & Williamson, for appellant. Z. T. Wood, for appellee.

RIDDICK, J. (after stating the facts).

This action was brought by Hickman against Martin upon a contract alleged to have been made by Clary, as agent of Martin. Hickman contends that Clary, acting as agent for...