Little Rock Railway & Electric Co. v. North Little Rock
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Pulaski Chancery Court. JESSE C. Hart, Chancellor. STATEMENT BY THE. COURT. On the 16th day of March, 1903, the General Assembly passed an act authorizing parts of one municipal corporation to be annexed to another municipal corporation. This act is contained in section 5522, Kirby’s Digest.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Pulaski Chancery Court. JESSE C. Hart, Chancellor. STATEMENT BY THE. COURT. On the 16th day of March, 1903, the General Assembly passed an act authorizing parts of one municipal corporation to be annexed to another municipal corporation. This act is contained in section 5522, Kirby’s Digest. On the nth of May, 1903, petitions were filed with the town council of the town of North Little Rock, signed by a majority of the citizens of that'town and a majority of the citizens of the Eighth Ward-of the city of Little Rock, praying for the annexation of the Eighth Ward of Little Rock to…
1Opinion of the Court
Hire, C. J.,
(after stating the facts.) 1. ^The franchise sought to be enjoyed was granted by the council of Little Rock, August 10, 1902, when the jurisdiction'of the city of Little Rock over the Eighth Ward thereof, where the franchise was to have been enjoyed, would have ceased for all purposes but for the injunction granted for the instance of the city of Little Rock, this appellant company, and other parties to the suit.
One of the grounds relied upon for the injunction was the probability that the other municipality seeking to absorb this territory would grant therein street car…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- City of Cleveland v. Cleveland City Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Town of Searcy v. YarnellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1886
- City of Fort Smith v. McKibbinSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1883
- Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co. v. TaylorIllinois Supreme Court · 1890
- Hot Springs Electric Light Co. v. Hot SpringsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1902
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Nakdimen v. Fort Smith & Van Buren Bridge DistrictSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1914
- Hampton v. HickeySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1908
- Western Union Telegraph Co. v. FreemanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
- Mitchell v. MitchellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1963
- State Ex Rel. Grieve v. District Court of Eighth Judicial District Within & for Natrona CountyWyoming Supreme Court · 1927
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.