Legal Opinion
State v. Dabney
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Decided April 16, 1928PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtKirby, J.
This appeal necessitates the construction of § 36(d)iof act. 5, Special Acts of 1923 (Castle’s Supplement to Crawford & Moses’ Digest, § 5166). Information was filed against appellee charging him with operating motor vehicles for hire without the payment of license fee required under said section. The case was tried on an agreed statement of facts, which the court held insufficient to support a conviction, and dismissed the cause, from which the State has prosecuted this appeal.
■ The appellee, George Dahney, operates a business in the city of Little Rock under the style or name of…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Rathbun v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corp.Illinois Supreme Court · 1921
- Booth v. City of DallasCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1915
- Forbes v. ReinmanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1914
- State v. Bee Hive Auto Service Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1926
- Winfrey v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1918
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Hertz Drivurself Stations, Inc. v. SigginsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
- Armstrong v. Denver Saunders System Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1928
- State ex rel. Schroath v. CondryWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1954
- City of Corpus Christi v. McClaughertyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1955
- Mildred L. Smith v. Indemnity Insurance Company of North AmericaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1963
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.