Citizens' Pipe Line Co. v. Twin City Pipe Line Co.
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
Kirby, J.,
(after stating the facts). The ordinance ■of the city of Fort Smith complained of, granting the right to appellant company to construct and operate its gas pipe line and to transport gas through it for consumption and use to the Harding glass plant, was attached as an exhibit to the complaint, and it has long been established that, in suits in equity, exhibits to the pleadings are considered as parts thereof, and such exhibits as constitute the ground of the action, defense or counterclaim will control the allegations of the pleadings. El Dorado v. Citizens’ Light & Power Co., 158…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Cox v. SmithSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1911
- Sanderson v. TexarkanaSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
- Merwin v. FussellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
- Packet Co. v. SorrelsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1887
- Clear Creek Oil & Gas Co. v. Fort Smith Spelter Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1921
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- City of Little Rock v. RainesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1967
- City of Little Rock v. LinnSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1968
- Citizens' Pipe Line Co. v. Twin City Pipe Line Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1931
- Meek v. LoveSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1938
- Arkansas-Missouri Power Corp. v. City of RectorCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1947
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.