Legal Opinion · Dissent

Landers v. Stone

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided June 23, 2016No. CV-16-85Published

1DissentPaul E. Danielson, Justice

LsThe General Assembly has declared that it is the public policy of this state to provide retirement benefits to its judges in order to “attract and retain highly capable members of the legal profession for service in the state judiciary.” Ark. Code Ann. § 24-8-201 (Repl.2014). The forfeiture provisions at issue in this case — Arkansas Code Annotated sections 24-8-215(e) and 24-8-710(b) (Repl.2014) — achieve the exact opposite result. For all practical purposes, they guarantee the departure of the most experienced and seasoned members of the Arkansas judiciary — including, of course, the…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Massachusetts Board of Retirement v. MurgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Vance v. BradleySupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  3. Gregory v. AshcroftSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  4. Phillips Chemical Co. v. Dumas Independent School DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
  5. Jones v. CheneySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1973

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API