Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

State and Local Government Law

University of Michigan Law School

Journal

Arkansas

Publication Year

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Law

Judges-De Facto Judges, J. R. Swenson S.Ed. Jun 1948

Judges-De Facto Judges, J. R. Swenson S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

In 1947, the Arkansas legislature created an additional division in the First Chancery Circuit and provided that the office be filled until the next general election by Ruth F. Hale, the then Master of Chancery in that circuit. In Arkansas, divorce is an equitable proceeding, and from the date of her appointment, Chancellor Hale had granted an estimated 1,750 divorces. Defendant appealed a divorce decree granted by Chancellor Hale alleging it to be void. Held, decree vacated. Three judges dissented. Howell v. Howell, (Ark. 1948) 208 S.W. (2d) 22.


Evidence- Statutes - Contradiction Of Legislative Journal Entry To Show Date Of Receipt Of Bill By Governor, Emerson T. Chandler May 1948

Evidence- Statutes - Contradiction Of Legislative Journal Entry To Show Date Of Receipt Of Bill By Governor, Emerson T. Chandler

Michigan Law Review

Plaintiff, a tax assessor, sought to recover salary claims against a county, contending that compensation was payable under an act passed by the General Assembly but vetoed by the governor. An entry in the House journal reported delivery of the bill to the governor on March 5. The Assembly adjourned March 13, and the governor vetoed the bill March 28. An official receipt dated March 10 had been given for the bill by the governor's office. The Arkansas Constitution gives the governor five days within which to approve or disapprove the bill. If he fails to act, the bill becomes …


Recent Developments In Actions Against Nonresident Motorists, Maurice S. Culp Nov 1938

Recent Developments In Actions Against Nonresident Motorists, Maurice S. Culp

Michigan Law Review

When this subject was discussed several years ago, statutes in thirty-five states authorized service of process upon some state official in actions filed against nonresident motorists. The passage of such legislation has continued. Today, out of the forty-eight states and the District of Columbia, apparently only Missouri, Nevada and Utah do not make some provision for such service.

It is proposed herein to discuss the new statutes which have been enacted since the previous article was written, to consider significant changes and developments in older legislation, and to survey the recent judicial decisions interpreting these process statutes.


Constitutional Law-Due Process--Nonresident Motorist Statute Jun 1936

Constitutional Law-Due Process--Nonresident Motorist Statute

Michigan Law Review

Petition for writ of prohibition on the ground that the notice provided by the Arkansas nonresident motorist statute did not meet the requirements of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The statute required that service of process be had on the secretary of state and that the plaintiff send notice of such service to the nonresident defendant at his last known address by registered letter, and required that the defendant's return receipt or the affidavit of the plaintiff of compliance with the statute be filed in the office of the clerk of court. Held, the statute is …


Special Assessments - Constitutionality Of Legislation Modifying Means Of Enforcement Of Special Assessment Liens May 1935

Special Assessments - Constitutionality Of Legislation Modifying Means Of Enforcement Of Special Assessment Liens

Michigan Law Review

An Arkansas statute, affecting the mortgage securing certain special assessment bonds, provided, inter alia, for the extension of the interval between default in payment and sale under foreclosure from sixty-five days to at least two and a half years, reduced the penalty for non-payment from twenty per cent to three per cent, and provided that the possession of the delinquent property owner be undisturbed for four years after sale on foreclosure, thus modifying the law existing at the time the bonds were issued. The United States Supreme Court held the statute to be invalid as violating the constitutional prohibition …