State v. Phillips
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
Hart, C. J.,
(after stating the facts). The judgment of the circuit court was correct.
The stock district in question was attempted to be formed under the provisions of §§ 321-332 inclusive of Crawford & Moses ’ Digest, as amended .by act 427 of the General Acts of 1921. See General Acts of 1921, p. 427. Under § 321 of Crawford & Moses’ Digest, as amended by act 427 of the Acts of 1921, whenever twenty-five per cent, of the qualified electors of three or more townships in a body, as shown by the election returns for Governor at the last election preceding the date of the petition, shall…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Coleman v. HallumTexas Commission of Appeals · 1921
- Fesler v. EubanksSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1920
3Cited by4 opinions
- Moorman v. PriestSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1992
- Goggin v. RatchfordSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1950
- Reamey v. WattSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1966
- Wright v. BaxterSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1950