District Court, E.D. Arkansas — appointed by Franklin D. Roosevelt
District Court, W.D. Arkansas — appointed by Franklin D. Roosevelt
McLouth v. General Telephone Co. of the Southwest
District Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1958-08-26 · cited 1×
This case involved Arkansas landowners suing a telephone company and its tree-spraying contractor for damage to ornamental trees on their property caused by a hormone herbicide applied under the company's lines. The court found that the spray had drifted onto the plaintiffs' trees or been intentionally applied to them, resulting in death or injury to the trees and depreciation of the property's value. It held both defendants jointly and severally liable for $3,200 in damages, concluding that the defendants had acted negligently and, in part, intentionally, and that the proper measure of recovery was the reduction in the fair market value of the real estate. The court rejected the plaintiffs' request for treble damages under an 1883 timber statute, determining that it did not apply to chemical injury of non-timber trees and that a later statute governed instead.
propertytorts & liability
Terry v. AP Green Fire Brick Company
District Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1958-07-16 · cited 8×
This case was a wrongful death action brought by the administratrix of A. F. Terry's estate against AP Green Fire Brick Company, seeking damages after Terry died in a 1956 accident while backing a dump truck up an earthen ramp on the defendant's premises to unload clay. Terry was employed by an independent contractor (or its subcontractor) that hauled clay for the defendant, and the plaintiff alleged the death resulted from the unsafe condition of the ramp and negligent operation of a front-end loader by the defendant's employee. After a bench trial, the court found from the evidence that Terry's truck went off the ramp edge solely because he backed it up at an angle, with no defect in the ramp or negligence by the defendant contributing to the accident. The court held that the defendant owed Terry no duty of care under Arkansas law regarding the safety of the ramp or unloading operations, as the only retained control was over dumping location and the exceptions for liability to employees of independent contractors did not apply. The complaint was therefore dismissed.
torts & liabilitylabor & employment
Aaron v. Cooper
District Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1958-06-23 · cited 23×
The case involved a petition by the Little Rock School Board and Superintendent to suspend until January 1961 the gradual racial integration plan for public schools that had been adopted in 1955 and approved by the court in 1956. The court denied the petition after reviewing the history of opposition, state legislation, the Governor's use of the National Guard, and disruptions at Central High School. The core reasoning was that further delay would undermine the prior court orders requiring integration to begin in the 1957-58 school year and would not serve the public interest, including the educational needs of all students.
civil rightsfederal power
United States v. Esters
District Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1958-04-12 · cited 9×
The case involved a defendant convicted by a jury on two counts of violating federal liquor laws by selling unstamped whiskey and possessing equipment intended for illegal distilling, resulting in a three-year prison sentence plus five years of probation. The defendant sought bail pending appeal, asserting the appeal was in good faith and raised substantial questions, while the government opposed it on grounds that the appeal was frivolous or dilatory. Under the 1956 amendment to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 46(a)(2), bail is permitted unless the appeal is frivolous or taken for delay, shifting the burden to the government to show it should be denied. The court reviewed the trial record, found no substantial questions of fact or law, determined the appeal lacked merit based on sufficient evidence and lack of preserved errors, and denied the bail application.
criminal lawprocedure
McCargo v. Steele
District Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1958-03-07 · cited 11×
This case involved a dispute over a 1954 written contract between plaintiff Lelia McCargo and decedent Charles F. Steele, under which McCargo claimed entitlement to a one-fourth interest in Steele's Nevada County, Arkansas, real and personal property, including oil and gas leases and royalties, in exchange for performing stenographic and record-checking work. After the matter moved from probate court through chancery to federal court on diversity grounds, McCargo sought specific performance against executrix Alma Steele, who defended on grounds including invalidity of the contract, lack of consideration, mutual rescission or abandonment, and laches. The court found that McCargo had fully performed her obligations, that the contract was valid and supported by consideration, and that none of the defendant's affirmative defenses were established by the evidence. It therefore entered a decree granting specific performance. The decision rested on findings that Steele was competent, that the services were distinct from McCargo's regular employment, and that there was no credible proof of rescission, abandonment, or delay prejudicing the estate.
propertyprocedure
United States v. Baker
District Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1958-01-31 · cited 7×
In United States v. Baker, the defendant petitioned under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate his 1955 federal convictions and concurrent five-year sentences for forging endorsements on postal money orders, a treasury check, and related mail theft, which had been transferred for plea and sentencing under Rule 20 from the Southern District of Illinois to the Eastern District of Arkansas. The petitioner, then serving state sentences in Wisconsin, argued that the federal proceedings were flawed, including issues with the transfer consents, his guilty pleas, the handling of detainers from Indiana and Wisconsin, and the government's delay in taking custody. After reviewing the record of arraignment and sentencing—where the defendant was represented by counsel, entered knowing guilty pleas, and had an extensive criminal history detailed by a Secret Service agent—the court found no constitutional or jurisdictional defects. It held that the sentences were lawfully imposed to run consecutively to the Arkansas term and rejected claims about prior detainers or procedural irregularities as factually unsupported. The petition was denied.
criminal lawprocedure