Legal Opinion

Caldwell v. Dodge

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided March 25, 1929PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Hart, C. J.,

(after stating the facts). This court has uniformly held that the office of the writ of prohibition is to restrain an inferior tribunal from proceeding-in a matter not within its jurisdiction, but it is never granted unless the inferior tribunal has clearly exceeded its authority and the party applying for the writ has no other adequate protection against the wrong that shall be done by such usurpation. Macon v. LeCroy, 174 Ark. 228, 295 S. W. 31.

Again, in Merchants’ & Planters’ Bank v. Hammock, 178 Ark. 746, 12 S. W. (2d), 421, the court held that the writ of prohibition is never…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Stewart v. RamsaySupreme Court of the United States · 1916
  2. Merchants' & Planters' Bank v. HammockSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1929
  3. Order of Railway Conductors of America v. BandySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1928
  4. Ferguson v. MartineauSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1914
  5. Martin v. BaconSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Wright v. LecroySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1931
  2. Gainsburg v. Dodge, ChancellorSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1937
  3. Pacific Mutual Life Insurance v. TolerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1933
  4. H. J. Heinz Company v. DukeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1938
  5. Cummins' Administrator v. SchererCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1929

3 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