Stuttgart Electric Co. v. Riceland Seed Co.
Court of Appeals of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
Melvin Mayfield, Judge.
This is an appeal from a decision of the Arkansas County Chancery Court denying appellant’s request for a mandatory injunction to require appellee to remove a portion of a warehouse which encroaches onto appellant’s property by up to 2.3 feet. After trial on the merits, the chancellor issued a letter opinion which set out his findings and conclusions as follows:
1. The encroachment by the building is slight and was not done intentionally.
2. Due to its angle, the building line intersects with the actual property line. This could leave the [appellant] with approximately as…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Hardy v. BurroughsMichigan Supreme Court · 1930
- Rzeppa v. SeymourMichigan Supreme Court · 1925
- Cammers v. Marion CablevisionAppellate Court of Illinois · 1975
- Leffingwell v. GlendenningSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1951
- Hamilton v. SmithSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1948
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Clifford Family Ltd. Liability Co. v. CoxSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1998
- Proctor v. HuntingtonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2008
- Proctor v. HuntingtonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2008
- Adams v. MoodyCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2009
- Szymczak v. LaFerraraNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1995
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.