Arkansas State Board of Pharmacy v. Troilett
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1DissentCarleton Harris, Chief Justice
With the certain knowledge that I shall be deemed an “old fogy” in some quarters, I still desire to express my dissent in this case. Let it be borne in mind that there is no dispute but that appellees are violating the law; they admitted it. There was no pertinent fact remaining to be proved. Despite this circumstance, the Chancery Court refused to grant an injunction because a criminal penalty is provided in the act violated, Ark. Stat. Ann. § 82-944-953 (Repl. 1960), and “because of the difficulty in the enforcement of the injunction”. I do not agree that the criminal penalty provides…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- State v. VaughanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1906
- Meyer v. SeifertSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1949
- Cavalier Vending Corp. v. State Board of PharmacySupreme Court of Virginia · 1954
- Florida Industrial Commission v. HurlbertDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1959
- Gallup v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1923