Black v. Brinkley

Decision Date04 April 1891
Citation15 S.W. 1030,54 Ark. 372
PartiesBLACK v. BRINKLEY
CourtArkansas Supreme Court

APPEAL from Monroe Circuit Court, M. T. SANDERS, Judge.

Black and another, on the 24th of February, 1888, made application for a writ of certiorari, upon notice served upon the mayor and recorder of the town of Brinkley. The petition alleged that, on the 9th day of May, 1887, forty-three persons presented a petition to the county court of Monroe county praying the court to annex certain territory therein described to the town of Brinkley; that said petition prayed that territory on the north, south, east and west of the town of Brinkley be annexed thereto; that nearly all of the signers to the petition lived in the territory lying west and south of said town; that the owners of the land on the east and north of the town did not join in the petition, and a majority of them did not wish to have their lands annexed to the town; that appellants owned a large part of the territory sought to be annexed to the town; that, on the filing of said petition, the county court fixed the 13th day of June, 1887 as the time for hearing the same, and the mayor's office in said town of Brinkley as the place; that, on said 9th day of May, 1887, the county court adjourned to court in course that, notwithstanding the court was adjourned for the term the county judge caused John T. Box, who had been named in said petition as petitioners' agent, to give notice by publication in the Brinkley Argus, a newspaper published at Brinkley, that the court would be held on the 13th day of June, 1887, at the office of the mayor of the town of Brinkley, for the purpose of considering said petition; that on said 13th day of June, 1887, the county judge, with the county clerk and a deputy sheriff, did assemble at the office of the mayor of the town of Brinkley, and pretended to hold a session of the county court, and granted the prayer of petitioners, and declared the territory described in said petition to be annexed to the town of Brinkley; that on the 16th day of June, 1887, the county clerk notified the council of the town of Brinkley of the action of the county judge, and, on the 22d day of June, 1887, the council by resolution accepted said territory as a part of the town. Wherefore, they prayed that a writ of certiorari be issued, directing the county clerk to certify to the court all the papers, records and proceedings in connection with the matter, and that the order of annexation be quashed.

The town of Brinkley appeared by counsel and answered the petition. It denied that a majority of the owners of the land on the north and east did not join in the petition for annexation, and denied that the county court adjourned on May 9th till court in course, but alleged that it adjourned to meet on June 13th at the mayor's office in Brinkley. The subsequent proceedings were admitted to be as alleged.

The record of the proceedings of the county court on the 9th day of May shows the filing of the petition for annexation, and the fixing of June 13th for the hearing,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
50 cases
  • Red River Valley Brick Co. v. City of Grand Forks
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • February 5, 1914
    ... ... 227; Newman v. Sylvester, ... 42 Ind. 106; Madison v. Smith, 83 Ind. 502; ... Swift v. Williamsburgh, 24 Barb. 427; Black v ... Brinkley, 54 Ark. 372, 15 S.W. 1030; Coler v. Dwight ... School Twp. 3 N.D. 249, 28 L.R.A. 649, 55 N.W. 587; ... State ex rel. Minot v ... ...
  • Light v. Self
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • March 24, 1919
    ...al. v. Payne, 28 Ark. 87; Moore v. Turner, 43 Ark. 243; Pearce ex parte, 44 Ark. 509; Burgett v. Apperson, 52 Ark. 213, 12 S.W. 559; Black v. Brinkley, supra; Sumerow v. Johnson, Johnson v. West, supra. See also to same effect cases cited in 1 Words and Phrases, 618, "Certiorari" "As Discre......
  • Curtis v. Sexton
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • July 10, 1913
    ...11 Tex. 249; Commonwealth v. Wildwood, 60 N.J.L. 365; McFall v. Dorer, 57 A. (N.J.) 136; Mitchell v. Harrison, 32 Tex. 331; Black v. Brinkley, 54 Ark. 372; State v. Hoboken, 39 N.J.L. 421; Harris on Certiorari, secs. 82 and 102; R.S. 1909, sec. 2078. (b) Notice and hearing, before property ......
  • The State At Relation of Bixman v. Denton
    • United States
    • Kansas Court of Appeals
    • January 27, 1908
    ... ... directed to the officer having the prisoner in custody. 2 ... Spelling on Extr. Rem., 1984, 1988; Black v. Town of ... Brinkley, 15 S.W. 1030; Sammerman v. Borough of ... Wildwood (N.J.), 40 A. 1132; Com. v. Borough of ... Wildwood, 38 A. 22, 60 ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT