Reisinger v. Road Improvement District No. 8
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Crittenden Circuit Court; JR. H. Dudley, Judge; The assessment of benefits was arbitrary, -unjust, discriminatory and unlawful. The zone system was adopted and no attention was paid to improvements on the lands in rural districts, but in cities and towns betterments were considered. 130 Ark. 70; 127 Id. 310. The whole scheme of assessments adopted here was "incorrect on its face — a demonstrable mistake.”
Read the full summary
Appeal from Crittenden Circuit Court; JR. H. Dudley, Judge; The assessment of benefits was arbitrary, -unjust, discriminatory and unlawful. The zone system was adopted and no attention was paid to improvements on the lands in rural districts, but in cities and towns betterments were considered. 130 Ark. 70; 127 Id. 310. The whole scheme of assessments adopted here was "incorrect on its face — a demonstrable mistake.” It is impossible to reconcile the discriminations made. 118 Ark. 301; 131 Id. 65; 123 Id. 210; 118 Id. 127; 133 Id. 64; 212 S. W. 334; 205 Id. 894; 1 Page & Jones on Tax. by…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCulloch, C. J.
By special act No. 55, of the regular session of 1919, the Legislature created three road districts in Crittenden County, numbered, respectively, 7, 8 and 9, for the purpose of improving certain roads in said districts. Separate boards of commissioners were created for each district, and each board was authorized by the statute to construct the improvements and to appraise the benefits on the lands affected by the improvement. The statute provides that the list of benefits assessed shall be returned by the commissioners to the county court, and after publication the court hears complaints of…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Missouri Pacific Railroad v. Conway County Bridge DistrictSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1918
- St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad v. Fort Smith & Van Buren Bridge DistrictSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1914
- Board of Improvement of Waterworks Improvement District No. 22 v. Southwestern Gas & Electric Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
- Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. Road Improvement District No. 1Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1919
- Kansas City Southern Railway Co. v. Road Improvement District No. 6Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1919
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Bulloch v. Dermott-Collins Road Improvement DistrictSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1922
- Ford v. Plum Bayou Road Improvement DistrictSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1924
- Burr v. Beaver Dam Drainage DistrictSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1920
- Sloan v. Village Creek Drainage DistrictSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1926