TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Franks v. Holly Grove

Franks v. Grove, 124 S.W. 514 (Ark. 1910)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Arkansas · State Highest Courts
Decided
January 10, 1910
Judges
Wood
Citations
124 S.W. 51493 Ark. 2501910 Ark. LEXIS 283
Disposition
affirmed.
Headnotes
Municipal corporations — liability for acts of officers. — Municipal corporations are not liable for the wrongful acts of their officers in enforcing void ordinances.
Summary
Appeal from Monroe Circuit Court; Eugene Lankford, Judge; The ordinance was void because in conflict. Sec. 1553, Kirby’s Dig. A town cannot pass an ordinance in conflict with the general law of the State'. Art. 12, sec. 4, Const. 1874. The city is unquestionably liable for negligence of its officers and agents which results in injury to persons. 90 Minn. 158; 95 N. W. 908; 91 U. S' 540; L. R. 1 H. L. Cas. (N. S.) 93; 2 Cl. & F. 331; D. R. x Eng. & Ir. App. 93; 1 Hurl. & N. 439; 11 Ad. & Ell. 223; 37 Eng. E. & Eq. 495; 1 Black, 39; 66 U. S. 52; 2 Black, 590; 4 Wall. 658; 37 N. Y. 568; 45 N. Y. 129; 3 N. Y. 463; 16 N. Y. 158; 36 N. Y. 54; 17 Ill. 143; 25 Ill. 535; 49 Ill. 476; 34 Conn. 1; 9 Ired. 73; 20 Md. ,468; 22 Pa. St. 54; Id. 388; 24 Wis. 270 and 342; 17 Gratt. 241 and 375; 15 O. St. 476; 12 Id. 377; 51 Ala. 139; 202 Ill. 545; 67 N. E. 386; 9 la. 461; 1 Kan. 544; 27 La. Ann. 162; 71 Me. 267-; 36 Am. R. 308; 50 Md. 138; 131 Mass. 23; 41 Am. R. 185; 5 N. Y. 369; 55 Am. Dec. 347; 41 O. St. 149; 9 Hump. 756; 20 Ga. 635; 19 N. W. 114; 14 Fed. 567; 2 Pac. 685; 16 Kan. 358; 9 S. W. 884; 86 N. E. 757; 106 Minn. 94; 118 N. W. 259; 132 Mo. 287; 111 S. W. 878; 35 Mont. 161; 88 Pac. 789; 81 N. E. 268. Towns and cities are not liable for the acts or omissions of their officers or agents while acting in their public or governmental capacity. 73 Ark. 447; 34 Ark. 105; 73 Ark. 519; 78 Vt. 104; 56 Vt. 228; 70 Vt. 308; 40 Atl. 829; 61 Ark. 494; 115 Mich. 275; 72 Wis. 289; 61 Wis. 31; 96 N. C. 293; 65 Vt. 247; 27 Ark. 572; 49 Ark. 139; 52 Ark. 84. No such action lies unless given by statute. 9 Mass. 250; 17 Johns. 439; 12 La. 858; 1 Gill. 567; 8 Barb. 645; 21 Cal. 426; 11 N. Y. 392.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Wood

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Wood, J. This appeal is to determine whether an incorporated town is liable in damages for the acts of its mayor and marshal in enforcing by unlawful imprisonment a void ordinance of 'the town making it a misdemeanor for persons fifteen years of age and under to get on or off any moving trains within the corporate limits such persons- not being passengers. What these officers did in connection with the arrest, conviction and imprisonment of appellant was in their capacity as public officers. They acted without malice toward appellant. Although the ordinance was illegal and void as to minors under the age of twelve years, still the appellee is not liable for the acts of its officers in seeking to enforce it, for the reason that the officers were acting in a public and governmental capacity.' The functions they performed were of a public, not private, nature. 28 Cyc. 1257. As early as the case of Trammell v. Russellville, 34 Ark. 105 , we held: “For acts done -by them in their public capacity, and in discharge of their duties to the public, cities and towns incur no liability to persons who may be injured by them. Neither for the act of the council in passing an illegal ordinance, nor for that of the mayor in issuing a warrant of arrest for the violation, nor for that of the marshal in arresting the offender under it, is a town liable to him.” And as late as Collier v. Fort Smith, 73 Ark. 447 , we said:" “Towns and cities are not answerable for the acts or amissions of their officers or agents while acting for the State or sovereign in public or governmental capacity.” See also Gray v. Batesville, 74 Ark. 519 . Whatever may be the rule in other jurisdictions, the above is the established doctrine of this court. It has good reason and authority to sustain it, and we therefore adhere to it. See other authorities cited in appellee’s brief.

The judgment therefore is affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 10 cases

View all citing references →
1911: 11914: 21915: 21925: 11938: 11939: 11968: 11996: 119112026peak 1914 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Elrod v. City of Daytona Beach180 So. 378 (Fla. 1938)
  2. White v. City of Newport933 S.W.2d 800 (Ark. 1996)
  3. Cummings v. Lobsitz1914 OK 382, 142 P. 993
  4. Silva v. City Council of City of McAlester1915 OK 199, 148 P. 150
  5. Parish v. Pitts429 S.W.2d 45 (Ark. 1968)
  6. Jones v. Sewer Improvement District No. 3177 S.W. 888 (Ark. 1915)

Most recent

  1. White v. City of Newport933 S.W.2d 800 (Ark. 1996)
  2. Parish v. Pitts429 S.W.2d 45 (Ark. 1968)
  3. Kramer v. City of Jefferson124 S.W.2d 525 (Mo. Ct. App. 1939)
  4. Elrod v. City of Daytona Beach180 So. 378 (Fla. 1938)
  5. Holt v. Texarkana271 S.W. 960 (Ark. 1925)
  6. Jones v. Sewer Improvement District No. 3177 S.W. 888 (Ark. 1915)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
Trammell v. Town of Russellville, 34 Ark. 105 (1879) 32
Collier v. Fort Smith, 68 L.R.A. 237 (Ark. 1904) 14
Gray v. Batesville, 86 S.W. 295 (Ark. 1905) 7

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list