Taylor v. Patterson

670 S.W.2d 444, 283 Ark. 11, 1984 Ark. LEXIS 1690
CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas
DecidedJune 11, 1984
Docket84-103
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 670 S.W.2d 444 (Taylor v. Patterson) 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
Taylor v. Patterson, 670 S.W.2d 444, 283 Ark. 11, 1984 Ark. LEXIS 1690 (Ark. 1984).

Opinion

Darrell Hickman, Justice.

On appeal the appellants argue only that Act 656 of 1983, which sets the minimum salaries of the Marshall, Arkansas, municipal court judge and clerk, is unconstitutional in that it deprives the rural citizens of Searcy County equal protection and due process under the law. That contention was not raised below. The only constitutional argument below was in the appellants’ answer where they averred that Act 656 was special or local legislation in violation of Amendment 14 to the Arkansas Constitution.

The trial court’s decision that Searcy County is liable to pay one-half of the minimum salary requirements of Act 656 is affirmed because we do not consider arguments raised for the first time on appeal, even those arguments that are constitutional in nature. Sweeney v. Sweeney, 267 Ark. 595, 593 S.W.2d 21 (1980).

Affirmed.

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

Related

Ashworth v. State
816 S.W.2d 597 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1991)
Pope County v. Streett
682 S.W.2d 749 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1985)
Todd v. State
678 S.W.2d 345 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1984)
Walters v. State
675 S.W.2d 364 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1984)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
670 S.W.2d 444, 283 Ark. 11, 1984 Ark. LEXIS 1690, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taylor-v-patterson-ark-1984.