Fenolio v. Sebastian Bridge District
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Sebastian Chancery Court, Fort Smith District; W. A. Falconer, Chancellor; 1. The Act had no legal existence after the two years limitation had expired, by reason of the failure to exercise the powers conferred, and the attempt to revive it in 1915 was in vain ¡and unconstitutional. It could not be amended or revived. Const. Art. 5, §, 23; 26 A. & E. Enc. L. (2d Ed.) 703; 90 Am.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Sebastian Chancery Court, Fort Smith District; W. A. Falconer, Chancellor; 1. The Act had no legal existence after the two years limitation had expired, by reason of the failure to exercise the powers conferred, and the attempt to revive it in 1915 was in vain ¡and unconstitutional. It could not be amended or revived. Const. Art. 5, §, 23; 26 A. & E. Enc. L. (2d Ed.) 703; 90 Am. St. 153. The Act was passed when it was approved 'by the Governor. 101 Ark. 173; 101 Id. 166. At the time of the passage of the Act of 1915, the original Act was not in existence nor susceptible of…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCULLOCH, C. J.
Appellant, who is the owner of real property within the territory designated in a special statute as the Sebastian County Bridge District, imstituted this action in the court below against the district and the commissioners thereof to enjoin proceedings to-word the construction of the improvement, the levying of assessments, and issuance of bonds. The attaJek is upon the validity of the statute, as well as upon the regularity iand legality of the proceedings thereunder. i
The statute creating the improvement district was enacted by the General Assembly of 1913 (Acts of 1913, p. 380) and the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Arkansas Tax Commission v. MooreSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
- Shibley v. Fort SmithSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
- Harrington v. WhiteSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1917
- Boyd v. BryantSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1879
- Watkins v. Eureka SpringsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1886
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Van Dyke v. MackSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1919
- Farris v. WrightSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
- Texarkana-Forest Park Paving, Water, Sewer and Gas District No. 1 v. State Use Miller County.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1934
- Gaster v. Dermott-Collins Road Improvement DistrictSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
- Miller v. WitcherSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.