Keck v. Northcutt
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Fulton Chancery Court; Lyman F. Reeder, Chancellor; Act 266, Acts 1919, special session, is void and unenforceable because the county court intended by it to make the order creating the road district and the court was without jurisdiction to make the order, for no county court can make an order having any effect upon lands within the territory of another county court. The act is void for ambiguity of sections 8 and 10 also.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Fulton Chancery Court; Lyman F. Reeder, Chancellor; Act 266, Acts 1919, special session, is void and unenforceable because the county court intended by it to make the order creating the road district and the court was without jurisdiction to make the order, for no county court can make an order having any effect upon lands within the territory of another county court. The act is void for ambiguity of sections 8 and 10 also. The whole act should be construed together, and, so doing, it is thoroughly enforceable, and there is no ambiguity in §§ 8 and 10 of said act, and the demurrer…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
This suit questions the validity of act No. 266 of the special session of the General Assembly of 1920. It is said that the act is void because of the ambiguity of sections 8 and 10 thereof.
By section 1 of the act it is provided that the persons made defendant herein shall be commissioners of the Fulton and Izard Improvement District No. 4, and creates said improvement district for the purpose of building and maintaining a highway in Fulton and Izard counties. It also provides that two of the three commissioners shall be residents of Fulton County and own property within the district, and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Wood v. WilleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1919