Parish v. Pitts
Supreme Court of Arkansas
244 Ark. 1239
Mrs. Dora Louise PARISH and Thomas L. Parish, her husband v. Ollie W. PITTS and the CITY OF LITTLE ROCK
Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court
No. 5-4134.---Delivered: June 3, 1968.
Rehearing denied: July 15, 1968.
- COURTS—RULES OF DECISION—POWER TO OVERRULE.—Doctrine of stare decisis whereby precedent is followed to give predictability to the law and to avoid unsettling things is fundamental to the common law; so too is the power to overrule a line of decisions, even those under which property rights were acquired.
- COURTS—ERRONEOUS RULES OF DECISION—POWER TO OVERRULE.—Where a former rule, established by precedent, no longer gives a just result and more good than harm will result from changing it, it will be overruled.
- MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS—TORTS, LIABILITY FOR—REMOVAL OF IMMUNITY.—Rule of law established by precedent granting to municipalities immunity from liability for damages negligently inflicted on others while acting in a governmental capacity is overruled.
- MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS—RULE OF NON-IMMUNITY FOR TORTS—TIME OF TAKING EFFECT.—Rule of non-immunity of municipality for tort liability would apply only to present action and actions arising out of occurrences after date opinion announcing the rule becomes final.
- MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS—RULE OF NON-IMMUNITY FOR TORTS—NATURE & GROUNDS OF LIABILITY.—Rule of non-immunity of municipality for torts imposes liability only for the imperfect, negligent, unskillful execution of a thing ordained to be done.
- MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS—RULE OF NON-IMMUNITY FOR TORTS—JUDGMENT & DISCRETION, LIABILITY FOR.—No tort action will lie against a municipality for those acts involving judgment and discretion which are judicial and legislative, or quasi-judicial and quasi-legislative in nature, since the exercise of discretion carries with it the right to be wrong, and it is only for ordinary torts committed in the execution of the activities decided upon that a tort action will lie; not for the decision itself.
- COURTS—RULES OF DECISION—APPLICATION OF RULE.—In determining non-immunity of municipalities for tort liability, consideration was not given to liability of any other governmental unit or political subdivision.
Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court, Third Division, Joe Rhodes, Judge; reversed.
Alonzo D. Camp, for appellants.
Joseph C. Kemp, City Attorney; John B. Plegge, Asst. City Attorney, for appellees.
Warner, Warner, Ragon & Smith; Henry Woods and Dale Price; Terral, Rawliings, Matthews & Purtle; Spitzberg, Bonner, Mitchell & Hays; F. N. Burke Jr., Roscopf & Raff, David Solomon, John L. Anderson, Oscar Fendler, Rieves & Rieves; Frierson, Walker & Snellgrove; Glenn G. Zimmerman, William G. Fleming and W. H. Dillahanty, amici curiae.
[Opinion of the court by Special Justice WM. M. MOORHEAD. Concurring opinion by Justice GEORGE ROSE SMITH. Dissenting opinions by Chief Justice CARLETON HARRIS and Justice JOHN A. FOGLEMAN. Justice J. FRED JONES not participating.]
This work is in the public domain in the U.S. because it is an edict of a government, local or foreign. See § 313.6(C)(2) of the Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices. Such documents include "legislative enactments, judicial decisions, administrative rulings, public ordinances, or similar types of official legal materials" as well as "any translation prepared by a government employee acting within the course of his or her official duties."
These do not include works of the Organization of American States, United Nations, or any of the UN specialized agencies. See Compendium III § 313.6(C)(2) and 17 U.S.C. 104(b)(5).
A non-American governmental edict may still be copyrighted outside the U.S. Similar to {{PD-in-USGov}}, the above U.S. Copyright Office Practice does not prevent U.S. states or localities from holding copyright abroad, depending on foreign copyright laws and regulations.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse