Legal Opinion · Dissent

Mitchell v. Mitchell

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided May 28, 1951No. 4-9510Published

1DissentGeorge Eose Smith, J.

I think the majority misconceive the purpose of § 55-102, which was enacted in 1941. The earlier statute, § 9044 of Pope’s Digest, required parental consent to a minor’s marriage but did not expressly permit the parent to bring an action for annulment when the consent had not been given. In Witherington v. Witherington, 200 Ark. 802, 141 S. W. 2d 30, the majority held that a nonconsenting parent could not bring an action to annul the marriage. Judge Frank G. Smith wrote a vigorous dissent in which he said: “If we refuse to give effect to and to enforce these mandatory statutory provisions,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Witherington v. WitheringtonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1940

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API