From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Taylor v. Patterson

Supreme Court of Arkansas
Jul 16, 1984
670 S.W.2d 444 (Ark. 1984)

Opinion

No. 84-103

Opinion delivered June 11, 1984 [Rehearing denied July 16, 1984.]

APPEAL ERROR — FAILURE TO RAISE ARGUMENT IN TRIAL COURT — WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED ON APPEAL. — The Supreme Court does not consider arguments raised for the first time on appeal, even those arguments that are constitutional in nature.

Appeal from Searcy Circuit Court; George F. Hartje, Judge; affirmed.

William Clay Brazil, for appellants.

Jerry D. Patterson, for appellees.


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.


Summaries of

Taylor v. Patterson

Supreme Court of Arkansas
Jul 16, 1984
670 S.W.2d 444 (Ark. 1984)
Case details for

Taylor v. Patterson

Case Details

Full title:Duford TAYLOR et al v. Jerry PATTERSON, et al

Court:Supreme Court of Arkansas

Date published: Jul 16, 1984

Citations

670 S.W.2d 444 (Ark. 1984)
670 S.W.2d 444

Citing Cases

Walters v. State

The question was not raised to the trial judge, and the record does not reflect when the offense in question…

Todd v. State

The appellant raises a due process argument concerning the subpoena power, but it was not raised below, and…