# Garrett v. Andrews

> Supreme Court of Arkansas · December 21, 1987 · 294 Ark. 160

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9674531

## Case

- **Full name:** Jimmy D. GARRETT, Election Commissioner of Conway County, Arkansas, Et Al. v. Ed N. ANDREWS, George Andrews, Et Al.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Arkansas
- **Decided:** December 21, 1987
- **Citations:** 294 Ark. 160; 741 S.W.2d 257
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Hays
- **Judges:** Dudley, Hays, Hickman, Glaze, Purtle
- **Cited by:** 18 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/9674531

## Opinion text

Steele Hays, Justice, dissenting. While I agree with the dissenting opinions I feel the need to add my own views to the several being expressed. I read the opinion of Justice Lyle Brown in Henderson v. Anderson, 251 Ark. 724 , 475 S.W.2d 508 (1972) as precedent for this case. In Henderson this court held that the circuit court had jurisdiction to try wet-dry elections. Why? Because under the provisions of Act 456 of 1969 a contest of local option elections was removed from county court and placed in circuit court. There were no dissents to that holding and it binds us now, or should.
Wurst v. Lowry, 286 Ark. 474 , 695 S.W.2d 378 (1985) is not precedent for this case. In Wurst we held that an attempt in April 1984 to intervene in a local option election contest held in November, 1980 was “far too late.” We simply drew an analogy to the time allowed for contesting local option elections, which we mistakenly said was ten days, rather than twenty days. That was plainly dictum, the holding of the case being that a belated intervention years after the election was 1) too late and 2) without merit. That decision in no sense governs the case at hand. I respectfully dissent from the denial of rehearing.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9674531. Public record. Not legal advice.