Legal Opinion

Duennenberg v. City of Barling

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided June 8, 1992No. 92-132PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Steele Hays, Justice.

This is an election contest. The City of Barling (appellee/defendant) proposed to annex eight sections of land and portions of another ten sections belonging to the federal government and lying in Fort Chaffee, Sebastian County (Greenwood District), Arkansas. In furtherance of that objective Barling adopted Ordinance No. 202 providing for a special election on June 11, 1991, to consider the proposed annexation. Three days later Ordinance No. 202 was repealed and replaced by Ordinance No. 203, the only difference being a correction in the metes and bounds description of…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Files v. HillSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1980
  2. Lafargue v. WaggonerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1934
  3. Reed v. BakerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1973
  4. Robinson v. KnowltonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1931
  5. Jones v. EtheridgeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1967

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. King v. WhitfieldSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1999
  2. City of Barling v. Fort Chaffee Redevelopment AuthoritySupreme Court of Arkansas · 2001
  3. City of Dover v. City of RussellvilleSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2003
  4. Williams v. HarmonCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1999
  5. City of Barling v. Fort Chaffee Redevelopment AuthoritySupreme Court of Arkansas · 2001

2 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