Hall v. Potter
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Cleburne Chancery Court; George T. Humphries, Chancellor; If, as declared in 53 Ark. 430, the law then in force fixing the time for redemption allowed to persons under disability is a special and particular clause, even then it ought not to be held that the act of 1881 repealed it.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Cleburne Chancery Court; George T. Humphries, Chancellor; If, as declared in 53 Ark. 430, the law then in force fixing the time for redemption allowed to persons under disability is a special and particular clause, even then it ought not to be held that the act of 1881 repealed it. Repeals by implication are not favored. 11 Ark. 103; Id. 496. A general statute will not repeal a prior particular act, unless the two acts are irreconcilably inconsistent. 29 Ark. 225. See, also, 34 Ark. 499; 48 Ark. 159; 56 Ark. 45; 50 Ark. 132; 51 Ark. 559. In this case the sale was never reported to…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCueeoch, J.
The only question involved in this appeal is whether a person of unsound mind, whose lands have' been sold to the State under decree enforcing the payment of overdue taxes pursuant to the act of March 12, 1881, and which have been subsequently sold by the State to an individual, can redeem said lands from sale.
It was decided by this court in Railway v. Burke, 53 Ark. 430, that the right of an infant, whose lands had been sold to an individual under such decree, was limited to two years from date of sale, the same period allowed to adults in making such redemption. Section 11 of the act of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Little Rock Junction Railway Co. v. BurkeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1890
3Cited by3 opinions
- Schuman v. WestbrookSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1944
- Hudson v. HiloCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2004
- Home Life Insurance Co. v. WassonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1933