Carville v. Road Improvement District No. 2
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Craighead Chancery Court, Western District; Archer Wheatley, Chancellor; See. 4 of act 423,1921, does not violate sec. 22, art, 5 of the Constitution, as it is in effect a repealing statute. Repeals of statutes may be made by reference to title (47 Ark, 481; 99 Ark, 100), but an amendment cannot be so made. Sec. 4 does not impair the obligation of contracts.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Craighead Chancery Court, Western District; Archer Wheatley, Chancellor; See. 4 of act 423,1921, does not violate sec. 22, art, 5 of the Constitution, as it is in effect a repealing statute. Repeals of statutes may be made by reference to title (47 Ark, 481; 99 Ark, 100), but an amendment cannot be so made. Sec. 4 does not impair the obligation of contracts. The act does not attempt to affect the contracts in any. manner, either as to terminating them or forbidding their further enforcement. The cases recognize a distinction between the impairment of the obligations of a contract…
1Opinion of the Court
'Wood, J.
This action was instituted by the appellant against the appellees. He alleged, in substance, that appellee Road District No. 2 (hereinafter called district) was created and organized under act No. 97 of the Acts of the General Assembly of 1919, and that J. H. Whipple, H. H. McAdams and L. C. Glover aré its commissioners; that the above act was supplemented and amended by act 423 of the .Special Acts of the General Assembly of 1921, approved March 25, 1921, which act, among other things, provides as follows: “Sec. 4. The board of commissioners of said improvement district is hereby…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Hill v. RalphSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1924