Case law

Board of Directors of St. Francis Levee District v. Bowen

80 Ark. 80 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 23, 1906

This deed was made out on a printed form for a deed prepared by the Levee Board, and recited a nominal consideration of $1.00.

Board of Directors of St. Francis Levee District v. Powell

89 Ark. 570 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 15, 1909

Powell, instituted this action against the Board of Directors of St. … Seifrath v. State, 35 Ark. 412 . It is sufficient, however, if it appears inferentially from the bill of exceptions that it contains all the evidence. Leggett v. Grimmett, 36 Ark. 496 ; Overman v.

Board of Improvement Water & Light Improvement Districts v. Galbraith

133 Ark. 302 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 20, 1916

Hence Hatfield Special School District v. Knight, 112 Ark. 83 , and Boston Store v. … See Hatfield v. Knight, supra.

School Districts Nos. 41 v. Pope County Board of Education

177 Ark. 982 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 9, 1928

Assn. v. Bowlin, 63 Ark. 576 , 39 S. W. 1047 ; Black v. School District, 106 Ark. 572 , 173 S. W. 1104 . … Wulff v. Davis, 108 Ark. 291 , 157 S. W. 384 ; Ark. Brick & Tile Co. v. Crabtree, 172 Ark. 752 , 290 S. W. 361 .

Cabell v. Board of Improvement of Improvement District No. 10

124 Ark. 278 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 15, 1916

In West v. … In Davis v. Gaines, 48 Ark. 370 , the court said, that the board is a distinct agency for accomplishing the purposes of the statute.

Board of Directors St. Francis Levee District v. Permenter

192 Ark. 521 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 30, 1936

The attorney did not make any statement of fact to the jury, but just offered to prove by the witness that the board of directors had paid other property owners three times as much as their appraisers had ascertained the

Missionary Supporters, Inc. v. Ark. State Board of Dental Examiners

231 Ark. 38 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 19, 1959

Respondents lay no claim to license for the practice of dentistry from the Arkansas State Board of Dental Examiners or elsewhere and are clearly operating in violation of this Section. … See: Rithols v. State Board of Optometry, 206 Ark. 671 , 177 S. W. 2d 410 ; Hudkins v. State Board of Optometry, 208 Ark. 577 , 187 S. W. 2d 538 ; Marvel v. State ex rel. Morrow, 127 Ark. 595 , 193 S. W. 259 ; Melton v.

Scarborough v. Scarborough

54 Ark. 20 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 6, 1890

In Rie v. … Kurtz v. Kurtz, 38 Ark., 119; Brown v. Brown, id., 324. The parties to this suit, under the practice and decisions in this State, were competent witnesses. But the testimony, of the appellee is without corroboration.

Henry v. Board of Improvement of Paving District No. 3

170 Ark. 673 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 8, 1926

Bell v. Phillips, 116 Ark. 167 . It does not appear, however, that there is any uncertainty about the description of the boundaries. … (When so determined) the city council shall at once appoint three persons, owners of real property therein, who shall compose a board of improvement for the district.”

Scott v. County Board of Education of Saline Cty

182 Ark. 472 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 20, 1930

Hughes v. Special School District, 135 Ark 454 , 205 S. W. 824 . … So, by the authority of Hughes v.

Arkansas Savings & Loan Ass'n Board v. Central Arkansas Savings & Loan Ass'n

256 Ark. 846 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 1, 1974

[United States v. Chicago, M., St. P. & P. R.R., 294 U.S. 499 (1935).] Equally pertinent to the case at hand is a statement by the Oklahoma Supreme Court in Oklahoma Insp. Bur. v. State Bd. for Prop. & Cas. … Dura Craft Boats v. Daugherty, 247 Ark. 125 , 444 S.W. 2d 562 (1969). The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded, through the circuit court, to the Board for such further proceedings as may be necessary.

State ex rel. Robinson v. Craighead County Board of Election Commissioners

300 Ark. 405 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 13, 1989

We have been reluctant over the years to allow either a party committee or a board of election commissioners to remove a candidate’s name from a ballot. See Ridgeway v. … We have implicitly sanctioned the use of mandamus when seeking removal of a candidate’s name from the ballot or when requiring a board to place a candidate’s name on the ballot. Cummings v.

State v. Little

94 Ark. 217 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 14, 1910

Board of Equalization Cases, 49 Ark. 518 ; Prairie County v. Matthews, 46 Ark. 383 . … See, also, Board of Equalization Cases, 49 Ark. 518 ; Clay County v. Brown Lumber Co., 90 Ark. 413 ; Wells Fargo & Company’s Express v. Crawford County, 63 Ark. 576 .

Ouachita Valley Bank v. Pullen

181 Ark. 38 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 17, 1930

Wilson v. Davis, 138 Ark. 111 , 211 S. W. 152 . In support of the conclusion above reached we quote from the case of American Southern Trust Co. v. McKee, 173 Ark. 158 , 293 S. … This contention is answered in Greer v. Levee Dist., supra, and in the case of First Natl. Bank v. First Natl. Bank, 159 Ark. 517 , 252 S.

Mark Howerton v. Lona McCastlain, Chairman, Arkansas Post-Prison Transfer Board

2025 Ark. 144 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 2, 2025

Howerton v. State, 2012 Ark. App. 331, 413 S.W.3d 861. … Schuldheisz v. Felts, 2024 Ark. 137, 696 S.W.3d 817.

Pike County School District No. 1 v. Pike County Board of Education

247 Ark. 9 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Aug 25, 1969

Lyle Brown, Justice. This appeal stems from a school consolidation election in Pike County. … To the same effect see Wood v. Brown, 235 Ark. 500 , 361 S. W. 2d 67 (1962). In special cases ,an extended absence will not necessarily cause a forfeiture of voting residency.

Simpkins v. Simpkins

136 Ark. 588 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 9, 1918

Rose v. Rose, 9 Ark. 507 ; Brown v. Brown, 38 Ark. 324 ; O’Kane v. … In the case of Leonard v.

Wallace School District No. 1 v. County Board of Education

214 Ark. 436 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 17, 1949

This petition was filed with the County Board of Education on September 4, 1947. … Wheelis v. Franks, 189 Ark. 373 , 72 S. W. 2d 231 ; Fowlkes v. Wilson, 205 Ark. 895 , 171 S. W. 2d 958 .

Board of Dir, St. Francis Levee District v. Simon

206 Ark. 559 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 10, 1944

Co. v. Board of Directors, et al., 2 Fed. Supp. 38. … Co. v. Board of Directors, 81 Ark. 562 , 99 S.

Murray v. Murray Laboratories, Inc.

223 Ark. 907 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 28, 1954

Berkey v. Third Avenue Ry. Co., 244 N. Y. 84, 90-92 , 155 N. E. 58 , 50 A. L. … Brown, do you know what results followed with respect to those buyers who bought it commercially and used it on their flocks? A.