Legal Opinion
Cordell v. Kent
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Decided June 20, 1927PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMcHaNEY, J.
Appellee brought this suit to enjoin appellants, as commissioners of the Howard-Sevier Road Improvement District, from refunding its past due bonded indebtedness and interest under the provisions of act number 114, Acts of 1927, on the ground that said act- had been rejjealed by act 126 of 1927. Appellants demurred to the complaint, which was overruled, and, on declining* to plead further, the injunction issued. To determine the.correctness of this action of the court this appeal is prosecuted.
Act 114 is entitled, “An act to authorize road improvement districts in the State of Arkansas to…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Smith v. . the PeopleNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Sims v. CumbySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1890
- McFarland v. Bank of the StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1842
- McPherson v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1874
- Baugher v. RuddSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1890
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Sargent v. ColeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1980
- State Ex Rel. Attorney General v. Standard Oil Co. of LouisianaSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1929
- England v. State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1928
- Kendall v. RamseySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1929
- Drainage District 18, Craighead Cty. v. McMeenSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1931
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.