Heathscott v. Raff
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
Ray Thornton, Justice.
In this election case, the appellant’s eligibility to seek the office of prosecuting attorney is contested on the ground that he is not “learned in the law” as required by the Arkansas Constitution. Appellee Christopher Raff is the incumbent prosecuting attorney for the Seventeenth— East Judicial District of White and Prairie Counties, and the Democratic nominee in the general election for that office. Appellant John Parker Heathscott, who is not a licensed attorney, is the Republican nominee.
Mr. Raff moved for declaratory judgment and mandamus to have Mr. Heathscott’s…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Craig v. HarneySupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- State Ex Rel. Chavez v. EvansNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1968
- Little v. State ex rel. ParsellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1890
- LaFever v. WareTennessee Supreme Court · 1963
- State v. MatthewsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Abrams v. LamoneCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
- Weatherford v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2003
- Martin v. HumphreySupreme Court of Arkansas · 2018
- Abrams v. LamoneCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007
- Abrams v. LamoneCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2007