Midwest Buslines, Inc. v. Munson

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Midwest Buslines, Inc. v. Munson

622 S.W.2d 187, 274 Ark. 108, 1981 Ark. LEXIS 1413

CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas

DecidedOctober 13, 1981

Docket81-213

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 622 S.W.2d 187 (Midwest Buslines, Inc. v. Munson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Midwest Buslines, Inc. v. Munson, 622 S.W.2d 187, 274 Ark. 108, 1981 Ark. LEXIS 1413 (Ark. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The application for a temporary writ of prohibition is denied, the petitioners having appeared by their counsel in the trial court without questioning its jurisdiction. We treat the petition, however, as a petition for a writ of certiorari to correct a proceeding that is erroneous on the face of the record and as to which no other adequate remedy appears. Bridges v. Ark. Motor Coaches, 256 Ark. 1054, 511 S.W. 2d 651 (1974). The trial judge was in error in issuing a temporary restraining order without setting an expeditious hearing to determine whether the temporary restraining order should be dissolved, as required by Civil Procedure Rule 65 (b). Various hearings to be conducted by the Arkansas Transportation Commission do not satisfy the requirements of the Rule just cited. Upon application of any party to the case the trial court is directed to hold a hearing within ten days to determine whether the temporary order should be continued in force or be dissolved.

Hays, J., not participating.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

The application for a temporary writ of prohibition is denied, the petitioners having appeared by their counsel in the trial court without questioning its jurisdiction. We treat the petition, however, as a petition for a writ of certiorari to correct a proceeding that is erroneous on the face of the record and as to which no other adequate remedy appears. Bridges v. Ark. Motor Coaches, 256 Ark. 1054, 511 S.W. 2d 651 (1974). The trial judge was in error in issuing a temporary restraining order without setting an expeditious hearing to determine whether the temporary restraining order should be dissolved, as required by Civil Procedure Rule 65 (b). Various hearings to be conducted by the Arkansas Transportation Commission do not satisfy the requirements of the Rule just cited. Upon application of any party to the case the trial court is directed to hold a hearing within ten days to determine whether the temporary order should be continued in force or be dissolved.

Hays, J., not participating.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

622 S.W.2d 187, 274 Ark. 108, 1981 Ark. LEXIS 1413, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/midwest-buslines-inc-v-munson-ark-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack