Loyd v. Southwest Arkansas Utilities Corp.
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1ConcurrenceJohn A. Fogleman, Justice
I am both amazed and alarmed that this court would discuss an issue (1) not raised in the trial court, (2) not raised on appeal and (3) upon which the parties did not want a decision. The excuse for doing so is not only unprecedented, it is revolutionary in Arkansas jurisprudence. The opinion is purely legislative in nature, not just in the sense of lawmaking, but also in the sense of determining the extent of a utility company’s power of eminent domain. It makes policy determinations that should be left to the General Assembly. There is no reason for this gratuitous action, which is wholly…
2Cases cited40 opinions
- L. R. Junction Ry. v. WoodruffSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1887
- Otter Tail Power Company v. MalmeNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1958
- Tennessee Gas & Transmission Co. v. JackmanCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1949
- Patterson Orchard Co. v. Southwest Arkansas Utilities Corp.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1929
- Ricenbaw v. KrausNebraska Supreme Court · 1953
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.