Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Nowlin v. Magnolia Petroleum Co.
Citations: 229 Ark. 314; 314 S.W.2d 509; 1958 Ark. LEXIS 755Docket: 5-1605
Court: Supreme Court of Arkansas; June 23, 1958; Arkansas; State Supreme Court
C. N. Primm owns a property in Hampton, which he leased to Magnolia Petroleum Company, who then subleased it to J. H. Hannegan. The lease agreement stipulates that in the event of destruction by fire, explosion, or storm, the lessors (Primm) must repair the premises, while the lessee (Magnolia) is responsible for returning the service station to its original condition. Rent payments cease during repairs but resume once the lessee reoccupies the property. On October 9, 1955, a fire destroyed the building on the property, leaving a piece of metal protruding over the sidewalk. On November 2, Margarett Ann Nowlin, a minor, was injured after striking her leg against this metal. The complaint alleges negligence on the part of the defendants for failing to remove the hazardous debris. After plaintiff testimony, the trial court directed a verdict in favor of Magnolia and Hannegan, allowing the case to proceed against Primm, who was ultimately favored by the jury. The appellants argue that the court erred in directing a verdict for Magnolia and Hannegan. However, the record at the time of the directed verdict contained no evidence against them. Although Lawrence Primm later testified that Magnolia and Hannegan may still have had a duty regarding the debris, this testimony was not part of the record when the verdict was directed. Consequently, the appellants failed to establish a case against Magnolia and Hannegan, leading to the affirmation of the trial court's decision.