Martin v. Quinn
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1DissentJohn I. Purtle, Justice
The commissioners should have been removed and the majority opinion does not hold to the contrary. The special master, appointed by the city, was in cahoots with the city attorney and returned the recommendation expected of him. The hearings conducted by him and the conclusions he reached were obviously biased.
The law clearly required the three commissioners to make annual accountings of the funds entrusted to them. They did not do this for six years. After being challenged they came up with reports for each year within a matter of a couple of days. If such reports were so easy to come by,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Boullioun v. Little RockSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1928