Legal Opinion

St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided October 4, 1915PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Appeal from Washington Circuit Court; J. S. Maples, Judge; 1. The Railroad Commission was without authority to enact the Order No. 3085 becanse there was no petition, signed by fifteen or more bona fide citizens residing in the territory to he affected hy the order, npon which to base such order.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Washington Circuit Court; J. S. Maples, Judge; 1. The Railroad Commission was without authority to enact the Order No. 3085 becanse there was no petition, signed by fifteen or more bona fide citizens residing in the territory to he affected hy the order, npon which to base such order. Acts 1907, p. 356, § 1. The words “bona fide citizen” as nsed in the statute mean a natural person. 2 Words & Phrases, 1164-69; 63 Ark. 543; 7 Cyc. 133. 2. No authority is given iby the act to the Railroad Commission to compel two railroad companies to make a contract and construct a joint track…

1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.

An information was filed before a justice of the peace of Washington County in which it was charged that the appellant railroad company had failed and refused to comply with Order No. 3085 of the Railroad Commission of Arkansas, which said order required appellant to establish and maintain a joint interchange track at Fayetteville with the Kansas City & Memphis Railroad Company, and to do switching thereon. Judgment was rendered by default in the justice court, and an appeal was prosecuted to the circuit court, in which court a demurrer and an answer were filed. Various grounds of defense…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. School District No. 11 v. School District No. 20Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1897
  2. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. BellamySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1914

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Fitzwater v. Youghiogheny Hydro-Electric Corp.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1926
  2. Kansas City Southern Railway Co. v. Arkansas RailroadSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
  3. Fitzwater v. Hydro-Elec. Corp.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1926
  4. Opinion No., Texas Attorney General Reports1981
  5. Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion, Texas Attorney General Reports1981

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

Powered by the Exa API