Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Sutterfield v. Burbridge
Citations: 223 Ark. 854; 268 S.W.2d 900; 1954 Ark. LEXIS 764Docket: 5-440
Court: Supreme Court of Arkansas; June 14, 1954; Arkansas; State Supreme Court
The case involves a real estate sale contract between James F. and Ina Sutterfield (appellants) and Yern Eugene Burbridge (appellee). Burbridge paid a $200 deposit and agreed to further payments contingent on the sellers providing a marketable title, which included ownership of timber on the property. Upon discovering that the Sutterfields had previously sold the timber, Burbridge refused further payments, leading to a breach of contract claim. Burbridge initially filed a suit for damages but later took a non-suit and sought specific performance in chancery court, alternatively requesting restitution of the $200 and $405 in damages. The Sutterfields contended that Burbridge's initial suit for damages precluded him from seeking specific performance due to an election of remedies. The court ruled in favor of Burbridge, awarding him $200 but denying additional damages, as the request for restitution and damages was not seen as inconsistent with the first suit. The court affirmed the chancellor’s decision, finding the $200 award supported by the evidence. There were no cross appeals regarding the limited damages awarded.