# Gipson v. Crawfis

> Supreme Court of Arkansas · January 30, 1956 · 225 Ark. 903

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7814669

## Case

- **Full name:** J. A. Gipson v. Crawfis
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Arkansas
- **Decided:** January 30, 1956
- **Citations:** 225 Ark. 903; 286 S.W.2d 336; 1956 Ark. LEXIS 650
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Holt
- **Judges:** Holt, Robinson, Seamster, Second, Ward
- **Cited by:** 6 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7814669

## Opinion text

J. Seaborn Holt, J., dissenting in part. I think the decree should be affirmed as to all of the appellees.
At the outset we must keep in mind that we are not dealing with State Funds that have been deposited in the State Treasury and, therefore, would be subject to Legislative control when and if so deposited. In other words, we are dealing with cash funds that have never been deposited in the State Treasury, but are kept in a separate State Hospital Fund. The Legislature, under our recent holding in Gibson v. Ingram, 215 Ark. 812 , 223 S. W. 2d 595 , has the power to require all cash funds to be deposited in the State Treasury, but it has not done so as to the cash funds here involved.
Under Ark. Stats. §§ 59-208, 59-226 and 59-227, I think the Hospital Board has the authority to do exactly what it did here. The majority, referring to the provisions of the above sections, point out that § 59-226 provides that cash funds shall be deposited in a bank designated by the Hospital Board, and Section 59-227 authorizes the Board to use the cash funds for maintenance, support, and expenses of the State Hospital. Section 59-208 provides: “The Board may employ, or may authorize the employment of, such persons, guards, nurses, physicians, officers, assistants and attendants as may be necessary for the efficient and economical administration of the hospital, and shall fix their compensation, which shall be payable monthly.”
The record reflects that in February 1954 the Hospital Board was faced with the necessity of cutting back its cost of operation in order to meet a declining budget and in its judgment it became necessary to abolish certain positions then in existence and to consolidate and create new positions, consolidating the duties of certain of the old positions, and were all paid for out of Cash Funds. The State Hospital Board, acting under what it considered to be the best interest of the State Hospital, created the position of Director of Administration and abolished the positions of Assistant Hospital Administrator and Director of Personnel. The salary of the Assistant Hospital Administrator was $6,500 a year and that of the Director of Personnel $4,500 a year, or a total of $11,000 a year. The new position created by the Board contained the duties of both of the above positions, plus additional duties, and the salary was set by the Board of Control at $8,500 a year, paid from Cash Funds, thereby effecting a savings of $2,500 a year, in addition to providing more efficient management. It is significant to note that the new position created by the Board was submitted to the 1955 Legislature and is now contained, on a permanent basis, in the Appropriation Act under the identical title as created by the Board of Control. It is hardly necessary to say that the wisdom and advisability of allowing State Agencies to effect policies of reorganization and retrenchment where possible cannot be seriously questioned. Necessarily these agencies, and particularly the Hospital Board, must and do have a broad discretion.
In the Gibson v. Ingram case above, we said: “It will be observed that in the quoted provisions from these Constitutions there is the requirement of deposit into the treasury. But when these Constitutions are compared with the present Arkansas Constitution (of 1874), it is clear that our present Constitution requires only that money in the treasury shall not be removed except by legislative appropriation. There is no requirement in the present Arkansas Constitution that all public money shall be paid into the state treasury. The absence of such a provision from our present Constitution appears to have been a studied and deliberate omission. Certainly, such omission leaves the Legislature of this State free to provide that public money derived as in this case may be deposited as cash funds, for use by the state agencies and institutions.”
In my view there has been no violation here of any statute or constitutional provision of Arkansas.
The Chief Justice and Justice Robinson join in this dissent.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7814669. Public record. Not legal advice.
