Oglesby v. Fort Smith
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from. Sebastian Circuit Court, Fort Smith District; Daniel Hon, Judge; 1. Section 5473 of Kirby’s Digest does not prevent the city counsel from authorizing, without a yea and nay vote, a committee to employ an attorney, and such authority carries with it the power to agree with him as to his fee. Such agreement, if made, is binding upon the city. Dillon, Mun.
Read the full summary
Appeal from. Sebastian Circuit Court, Fort Smith District; Daniel Hon, Judge; 1. Section 5473 of Kirby’s Digest does not prevent the city counsel from authorizing, without a yea and nay vote, a committee to employ an attorney, and such authority carries with it the power to agree with him as to his fee. Such agreement, if made, is binding upon the city. Dillon, Mun. Corp., § 82; Id. p. 1199, § 802; 60 Tex. 522; 13 Cal. 531; 88 N. W. 981; 29 S. W. 880; 12 Kan. 426; 29 la. 282; Dillon, p. 1203, § 802; 17 N. Y. 584; 63 Pac. 804; 116 Ind. 15; 22 Mich. 104; 66 Ind. 396; 102 Ind. 372; 7 Cranch 299;…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, C. J.
Many years ago the city of Fort Smith granted a franchise to a foreign corporation called the Municipal Waterworks Company, to establish and operate waterworks in the city for the purpose of furnishing water to the inhabitants. The contract contained a provision that the city should have an option to purchase the plant at the expiration of a stipulated period. Near the exp ration of that period the city council decided to exercise the option and purchase the plant; but a dispute arose between the city and the water company concerning the price to be paid, and it became necessary, as it was…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- McCracken v. City of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
- Cutler v. Town of RussellvilleSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1882
- Martin v. HickmanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1897
- Cheatham v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1861
3Cited by3 opinions
- Arkansas Light & Power Co. v. CooleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1919
- Natural Gas & Fuel Corp. v. Norphlet Gas & Water Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1927
- Newbold v. StuttgartSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1920