Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 05-23-2001

Case Number: CA 00-1200

Judge: Andree Layton Roaf

Court: Court of Appeals of Arkansas, Division III

Plaintiff's Attorney: Fredye Mac Long of Severns & Long, Texarkana, Texas

Defendant's Attorney: Lisa B. Shoalmire of Dunn Nutter Morgan & Shaw, Texarkana, Texas

Description:
Appellees, Mayme Curry Wade, ShermanWade, Bishop Curry, Cynthia Moore, Veronica Stitt, Alton Stitt, Jr., and Alton Stitt, Sr. ("the heirs"), are owners of a forty-acre tract in Lafayette County. The heirs sued appellant, Daniel Dillard, owner of a two-thirds interest in the timber on the tract, alleging that Dillard wrongfully clear-cut and sold all of the timber on the property. A jury awarded the heirs $41,594.91, which represented one-third of the value of the timber and costs of restoration. Dillard appeals, and argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion for directed verdict and in giving jury instructions concerning conversion and wrongful cutting of timber. We affirm.


The appellees are the heirs of D.H. Rankin, who acquired the property in question in 1925, and who died intestate in 1939. Dillard, who owns a forty-acre tract adjoining the Rankin property, began contacting the heirs in 1992 in the attempt to purchase their interests in the property. Two of the heirs, Mayme Curry Wade and Cynthia Moore, refused to sell Dillard their interests, but he was successful in acquiring the one-ninth interest of Moore's brother, Clarence Curry, and a one-third timber interest from Paul Rankin, Jr., in 1992 or 1993.


At trial, Mayme Curry Wade testified that when she and her brother, Bishop Curry, went to Lafayette County in early October1993 to pay the property taxes, they observed that timber was being cut on their tract. Wade testified that she reported the matter to the sheriff and consulted with an attorney, who advised her that Dillard, as a co-tenant, could sue for partition and sale of the property. Consequently, because they did not want to lose the family's land and home place, Wade and her brother agreed to convey their two-ninths timber interest to Dillard in exchange for a deed to the interest he held in the "dirt." There was conflicting testimony about when those deeds were signed; Wade testified that the deeds were signed after she observed timber being cut from the property in early October, however, the deeds were dated and acknowledged in mid-September and on October 1, and Wade's attorney testified that the dates were correct. Nevertheless, after this exchange, Dillard held as co-tenant only a two-thirds undivided timber interest in the property.

* * *

Click the case caption above for the full text of the Court's opinion.

Outcome:
Affirmed.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Unknown
Defendant's Experts:
Unknown
Comments:
None

About This Case

What was the outcome of ?

The outcome was: Affirmed.

Which court heard ?

This case was heard in Court of Appeals of Arkansas, Division III, AR. The presiding judge was Andree Layton Roaf.

Who were the attorneys in ?

Plaintiff's attorney: Fredye Mac Long of Severns & Long, Texarkana, Texas. Defendant's attorney: Lisa B. Shoalmire of Dunn Nutter Morgan & Shaw, Texarkana, Texas.

When was decided?

This case was decided on May 23, 2001.