Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

52 Ark. 174

Killough v. Payne

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided May 15, 1889

Supreme Court of Arkansas · decided 1889-05-15

APPEAL, from Cross Circuit Court. J. E. Riddick, Judge. Payne sued Killough & Erwin in a justice’s court, alleging -that they were indebted to him in the sum of $26.65 for money had and received for his use and benefit from Edgar, Gage & Co. On appeal to the Circuit Court the defendants filed an ..answer denying that they received any sum for the use of the plaintiff.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1889-05-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently May 1966

4 state decisions

10188918901900191019201930194019501960decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1Consideration: Statute of Frauds. There is no evidence tending to prove that Killough & Erwin received any money for the use- of Payne. There was only a promise by them to accept the draft of Reeves in favor of Payne.

¶2The consideration of this promise was the payment, by-Edgar, Gage & Co., of an undisputed debt due from them to’ Killough & Erwin, which was evidenced by a draft accepted' by Edgar, Gage & Co. in favor of Killough & Erwin; but the payment of a sum which one is already legally bound to pay is not a valid consideration for a contract.

¶3There being no new consideration for the promise by Killough & Erwin to pay Payne’s debt, it is a collateral undertaking within the statute of frauds and is void. Chapline v. Atkinson, 45 Ark., 67.

¶4Reverse and remand.

/52/ark/174 · .json · Public domain