Legal Opinion

Priest v. Polk

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided November 28, 1995No. 95-1197Published

1ConcurrenceTom Glaze, Justice

This case, jurisdictionally, should have been filed in circuit court. It is clear that both circuit and chancery courts may have subject-matter jurisdiction of illegal-exaction cases; however, this court has held that an illegal exaction complaint was not proper where exclusive jurisdiction of the underlying matter was conferred on the circuit rather than the chancery court. Foster v. Jefferson County Quorum Ct., 321 Ark. 105, 901 S.W.2d 809 (1995) (supplemental opinion granting rehearing on other grounds). In Foster, we stated circuit court had jurisdiction of that illegal-exaction lawsuit…

Also in this document: Dissent.

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Pledger v. Featherlite Precast Corp.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1992
  2. Foster v. Jefferson County Quorum CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1995
  3. Catlett v. Republican Party of ArkansasSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1967
  4. Nelson v. Berry Petroleum CompanySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1967
  5. City of North Little Rock v. GormanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1978

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API