{
  "id": 1911633,
  "name": "Fitzpatrick v. Moore",
  "name_abbreviation": "Fitzpatrick v. Moore",
  "decision_date": "1890-03-01",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "4",
  "last_page": "4",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "53 Ark. 4"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 80,
    "char_count": 912,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.673,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.1375993354341632e-07,
      "percentile": 0.5776964216832718
    },
    "sha256": "15f7c6ddae686e537115932fd5810c01517f6c1511cd6cf763089300cdba1aec",
    "simhash": "1:0aadef63f9edb82b",
    "word_count": 155
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:24:25.796000+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Fitzpatrick v. Moore."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PER Curiam.\nThe consideration of the contract is not set forth in the written evidence of it, and the proof to show what the consideration was does not vary the terms of the writing. The court\u2019s finding of facts is sustained by the evidence, and the judgment is affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PER Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "J. C. Tappan, J. J. Hornor and Compton & Compton for appellant.",
      "U. M. & G. B. Rose for appellee,"
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Fitzpatrick v. Moore.\nDecided March 1, 1890.\nContract in writing \u2014 Parol evidence of consideration.\nWhere the consideration of a contract is not set forth in the written evidence of it, parol evidence is admissible to show what it was.\nAPPEAL from Phillips Circuit Court in Chancery.\nM. T. Sanders, Judge.\nA contract in writing recited the consideration of five dollars cash in hand paid and \u201cother good and valuable consideration.\u201d The court admitted oral evidence to show the nature of the consideration. To this action exception was taken.\nJ. C. Tappan, J. J. Hornor and Compton & Compton for appellant.\nU. M. & G. B. Rose for appellee,"
  },
  "file_name": "0004-01",
  "first_page_order": 28,
  "last_page_order": 28
}