Isrig v. Thomas

2 Citing cases

  1. Jones v. Balentine

    44 Ark. App. 62 (Ark. Ct. App. 1993)   Cited 12 times

    In the case at bar, the chancellor held that, in Arkansas, even executory family settlement agreements are not subject to the general requirement of consideration. In addition to Pfaff v. Clements, executory family settlement agreements were upheld as valid in the following cases: Isgrig v. Thomas, 219 Ark. 167, 240 S.W.2d 870 (1951); Barnett v. Barnett, 199 Ark. 754, 135 S.W.2d 828 (1940); and Davis v. Davis, 171 Ark. 168, 283 S.W. 360 (1926). Appellant also argues that the agreement is invalid because appellant's husband was not a party to it.

  2. Young v. Young

    593 S.W.2d 72 (Ark. Ct. App. 1980)

    The testimony as to the execution and delivery of the deed of Henry Young and wife to Edward Young, supported by testimony of various witnesses that they had seen the deed, the long exclusive possession of the land and payment of taxes by Edward Young, his widow and the appellees are sufficient to support the finding of the chancellor that the execution and delivery of the deed and the loss of same was established by clear, conclusive and satisfactory evidence. Isgrig v. Thomas, 219 Ark. 167, 240 S.W.2d 870 (1951); Carpenter v. Jones 76 Ark. 163, 88 S.W. 871 (1905). Affirmed.