{
  "id": 1425576,
  "name": "American Historical Society, Inc. v. Vestal",
  "name_abbreviation": "American Historical Society, Inc. v. Vestal",
  "decision_date": "1934-10-01",
  "docket_number": "4-3534",
  "first_page": "651",
  "last_page": "653",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "189 Ark. 651"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "27 S. W. (2d) 1005",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.W.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "181 Ark. 696",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        8724682
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/181/0696-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "509 W. 5",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "W.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 222,
    "char_count": 2597,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.505,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.05365177660936989
    },
    "sha256": "077d8fc72319414584dbbde9d111cc74914ef5911bcaabb58ee16e01f4da241f",
    "simhash": "1:bff09de38e151fac",
    "word_count": 420
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:25:52.773578+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "American Historical Society, Inc. v. Vestal."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Johnson, C. J.\nThis action was instituted by appellant against appellee in the municipal court of North Little Rock where a judgment was entered in favor of appellee. Upon appeal to the circuit court of Pulaski County, the result was likewise adverse to appellant, and this appeal must result in affirmance.\nThe suit was predicated upon the following written subscription contract:\n\u201cNumber 92, May 15,1929, de luxe edition. Arkansas and its people. In four volumes. Please enter my name as a subscriber in the above named publication, issued in three-quarters leather, for which I agree to pay to the order of the American Historical Society, Inc., the sum of sixty-five dollars ($65), upon delivery of same at my residence or place of business. Occupation: Florist. Name: Charles H. Vestal. Residence address: 509 W. 5, No. L. R.\u201d\nOn October 2, 1931, appellant notified appellee that delivery of the books called for in the subscription contract would be made during October and November, 1931, whereupon appellee advised appellant that he would not accept the books. The books were afterwards delivered but not accepted.\nThe trial court construed the contract as one to be performed within a reasonable time \u2014 same not providing any definite time for performance \u2014 and this is the first contention urged for reversal.\nWe are committed to the doctrine that where time of performance of a contract is not specified in the written instrument the law reads into it, \u201cperformance within a reasonable time,\u201d therefore, no error appears from this assignment. Dunn v. Forrester, 181 Ark. 696, 27 S. W. (2d) 1005.\nNext it is urged that error was committed in permitting appellee to testify that the sales agent who solicited the subscription contract told him that delivery of the books would be made about October, 1929. Certainly this testimony was at least a circumstance indicating what was considered a reasonable time by the parties for performance of the contract at the time, of its execution. This statement does not alter, vary, contra-diet or otherwise affect the contract, and was admissible and competent for the purpose indicated.\nThe question as to whether the contract was offered to be performed by appellant within a reasonable time after its execution was submitted to the jury under correct instructions, and the testimony is amply sufficient to sustain the jury\u2019s verdict; therefore the judgment must be affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Johnson, C. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Henry J. Burney, for appellant.",
      "Sam T. & Tom Poe and Raymond Jones, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "American Historical Society, Inc. v. Vestal.\n4-3534\nOpinion delivered October 1, 1934.\nHenry J. Burney, for appellant.\nSam T. & Tom Poe and Raymond Jones, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0651-01",
  "first_page_order": 669,
  "last_page_order": 671
}