Ex parte Batesville & Brinkley Railroad
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPLICATION for mandamus. For the statement of this case see the opinion of the Chief Justice, on page 89, which is referred to to avoid repetition. 1. This court has no jurisdiction to grant the writ, cite and comment on Allis, ex parte, 7 JEng., 100; Crise, ex parte, 16 Ark., 195; Good, ex parte, 19 ib., ipil; Jones v. Little Mock, 25 ib., 287; Price $ Barton v. Page, 25 Ark., 535; Pitch v. McDiarmid, 6 Ark., p85. 2. Mandamus will not lie to control the judicial discretion…
Read the full summary
APPLICATION for mandamus. For the statement of this case see the opinion of the Chief Justice, on page 89, which is referred to to avoid repetition. 1. This court has no jurisdiction to grant the writ, cite and comment on Allis, ex parte, 7 JEng., 100; Crise, ex parte, 16 Ark., 195; Good, ex parte, 19 ib., ipil; Jones v. Little Mock, 25 ib., 287; Price $ Barton v. Page, 25 Ark., 535; Pitch v. McDiarmid, 6 Ark., p85. 2. Mandamus will not lie to control the judicial discretion of a competent court of equity, having original jurisdiction, etc., although the contrary was held in Conway, ex parte,…
1Opinion of the Court
Smith J.
It was the practice of this court from 1842 to 1868, to entertain applications for a mandamus to compel Circuit Judges to grant injunctions. It was placed at first upon the original jurisdiction vested by the Constitution in the court to issue writs of mandamus, and upon the further ground that the issue or refusal of a preliminary injunction was not a judicial act, but the exercise of a ministerial discretion. Conway, ex parte, 4 Ark., 336.
And under the confusion of legal ideas involved in this theory of ministerial and judicial discretion, this court, in Dixon v. Field, 10 Ark.,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Flournoy v. City of JeffersonvilleIndiana Supreme Court · 1861
3Cited by18 opinions
- Levy v. AlbrightSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1942
- North Bend Stage Line, Inc. v. Department of Public WorksWashington Supreme Court · 1932
- In Re Constitutionality of House Bill No. 222Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1936
- St. Louis & North Arkansas Railroad v. MathisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Clark v. Utilities CommissionSupreme Court of Colorado · 1925
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.