Legal Opinion

Davis v. Wilson

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided February 23, 1931PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Hart, C. J.,

(after stating the facts).- It is well settled that courts of equity will not interfere, by injunction, to determine questions concerning the appointment or election of public officers, or their title to office; and it does not matter whether the incumbent is an officer de jure or de facto. 22 R. C. L. 113, p. 454.

This rule is in accord with the repeated holding of our own court. In Rhodes v. Driver, 69 Ark. 606, 65 S. W. 106, 86 Am. St. Rep. 116, the court quoted with approval from High on Injunctions, the following: “No principle of the law of injunctions, and perhaps no…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Griffin v. RhotonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1907
  2. Walls v. BrundidgeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1913
  3. White v. BerrySupreme Court of the United States · 1898
  4. Russell v. TateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1889
  5. Hester v. BourlandSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1906

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Rich v. WalkerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1964
  2. Sitton v. BurnettSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1950
  3. Matthews v. Bailey, GovernorSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1939
  4. Hutto v. RogersSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1935
  5. Sheffield v. HeslepSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1944

14 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