Legal Opinion

Howell v. Howell Stevens v. Stevens

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided January 12, 1948No. 4-8389 — 4-8371PublishedCited by 30 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

On the appellant's allegation that the decree from which he appeals is void, we treat the cause as having been brought up by certiorari.

Ruth Howell, plaintiff below, procured from the Second Division of Pulaski Chancery Court a decree of divorce from George Howell, the latter having declined to defend until enforcement of the decree was undertaken. He then asserted invalidity of Act No. 42 of 1947 under which the General Assembly attempted to relieve from obvious overwork the regular Chancellor — a Chancellor whose excellent record in many complicated cases has often been reviewed by this…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Hovey v. NobleIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
  2. City of Evansville v. State ex rel. BlendIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
  3. State ex rel. Jameson v. DennyIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
  4. Hall v. BledsoeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1916
  5. Oates v. RogersSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1940

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

3Cited by30 opinions

  1. McKenzie v. BurrisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1973
  2. Fernández Antonetti v. Corte de Distrito de PonceSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1950
  3. Bridges v. Arkansas Motor Coaches, Ltd., Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1974
  4. Pope v. PopeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1948
  5. Landthrip v. City of BeebeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1980

25 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