Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
City of North Little Rock v. Pfeifer
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Decided April 6, 2017No. CV-16-313Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJosephine Linker Hart, Justice
|7I agree that the circuit court had subject-matter jurisdiction to enter a writ of mandamus. Arkansas Code Annotated section 16-115-102 unequivocally states:
The circuit court shall have power to hear and determine petitions for the writ of mandamus and writ of prohibition and to issue such writ of mandamus and writ of prohibition to all inferior courts, tribunals, and officers in its respective jurisdiction.
The real issue is whether the circuit court should have issued a writ of mandamus. In my view, it was error.
In Young v. Smith, this court stated:
The rule of almost universal application…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Pender v. McKeeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1979
- Young v. SmithSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1998
- Manila School District No. 15 v. WagnerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2004
- Banning v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1987
- STATE DEPT. OF FIN. AND ADMIN. v. StatonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1996
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.