Arkansas Code Annotated

Ark. Code Ann. § 14-14-502 (2026)

Distribution of powers

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaArk. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Division. The powers of the county governments of the State of Arkansas shall be divided into three (3) distinct departments, each of them to be confined to a separate body, to wit: Those that are legislative to one, those that are executive to a second, and those that are judicial to a third.
1. Legislative. All legislative powers of the county governments are vested in the quorum court. The people reserve to themselves the power to propose county legislative measures and to enact or reject them at the polls independent of the quorum court. The people also reserve to themselves the power, at their option, to approve or reject at the polls any entire ordinance enacted by a quorum court.
2. Executive.
  1. The executive divisions of a county government shall consist of:
    1. The county judge, who shall perform the duties of the chief executive officer of the county as provided in Arkansas Constitution, Amendment 55, § 3, and as implemented in this chapter and who shall preside over the quorum court without a vote but with the power of veto;
    2. One (1) sheriff, who shall be ex officio collector of taxes unless otherwise provided by law;
    3. One (1) assessor;
    4. One (1) coroner;
    5. One (1) treasurer, who shall be ex officio treasurer of the common school fund of the county;
    6. One (1) surveyor; and
    7. One (1) clerk of the circuit court, who shall be clerk of the probate division of circuit court and ex officio clerk of the county court and recorder.
  2. There may be elected a county clerk in like manner as a circuit clerk, and in such cases, the county clerk may be ex officio clerk of the probate division of circuit court, if such division exists, of the county until otherwise provided by the General Assembly.
3. Judicial. The judicial divisions of a county government are vested in the county court, except with respect to those powers formerly vested in the county court which, by the provisions of Arkansas Constitution, Amendment 55, are to be performed by the county judge, and in the respective courts of this state as provided by law.
Limitations. No person or collection of persons being one of these departments, legislative, executive, or judicial, shall exercise any power belonging to either of the others, except in the instances expressly directed or permitted.

History. Acts 1977, No. 742, § 40; 1979, No. 413, § 5; A.S.A. 1947, § 17-3502; Acts 2001, No. 997, § 1.

Research References

U. Ark. Little Rock L.J.

Survey of Arkansas Law, Public Law, 1 U. Ark. Little Rock L.J. 230.

Case Notes

In General.

The clear division and separation of powers among the branches of county government provided by subsections (a) and (b) of this section makes it apparent that the government is no longer controlled and operated by only a single entity. Pulaski County v. Jacuzzi Bros., 317 Ark. 10, 875 S.W.2d 496 (1994).

Because terminated county employee's actions of reporting alleged misdeeds to quorum court members, sitting as a grievance committee, was reporting to the “appropriate authorities,” under § 21-1-602(2)(A)(ii), evidence supporting terminated employee's claim under the Whistle-Blower Act created a question of fact and it was thus an error for the trial court to have granted the county's motion for a directed verdict. Crawford County v. Jones, 365 Ark. 585, 232 S.W.3d 433 (2006).

Cited: Walker v. County of Washington, 263 Ark. 317, 564 S.W.2d 513 (1978); Davis v. Fulton County, 884 F. Supp. 1245 (E.D. Ark. 1995).

Subchapter 6 — Alternative Organizations

Effective Dates. Acts 1977, No. 742, § 118: Mar. 24, 1977. Emergency clause provided: “It is hereby found by the General Assembly that the passage of Amendment 55 to the Arkansas Constitution has caused major changes in the structure of county government and that, because of said changes, a need exists to modernize laws affecting county government. It is further found that the citizens of the several counties of the State are in need of services provided by county governments and said services can best be provided under the provisions of this Act. Therefore, an emergency is hereby declared to exist and this Act, being necessary for the public health, welfare and safety, shall be in effect from and after its passage and approval.”

Research References

C.J.S. 20 C.J.S., Counties, § 42 et seq.

U. Ark. Little Rock L.J.

Survey of Arkansas Law, Public Law, 1 U. Ark. Little Rock L.J. 230.

Case Notes

Authority Generally.

No county is authorized to pass an ordinance reorganizing its government in a manner contrary to the general law of the state. Clark County v. Miller, 291 Ark. 203, 723 S.W.2d 820 (1987).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 9 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1994–2026 · leading case: Helena Reg'l Med. Ctr. v. Wilson, 207 S.W.3d 541 (Ark. 2005).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Helena Reg'l Med. Ctr. v. Wilson, 207 S.W.3d 541 (Ark. 2005). · cites it 4× “3 (2004), the term “clerk of the court” means “the circuit clerk and, with respect to probate matters, any county clerk who serves as éx officio clerk of the probate division of the circuit court pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 14-14-502 (b)(2)(B).” Similarly, even if we were to…”

Davis v. Fulton Cnty., Ark., 884 F. Supp. 1245 (E.D. Ark. 1995). · cites it 4× “55; Ark.Code Ann. § 14-14-502 (Michie 1987), thus it likewise benefits from any immunity afforded by § 21-9-301, 21 cf.”

Crawford Cnty. v. Jones, 232 S.W.3d 433 (Ark. 2006). · cites it 2× “” Under Ark. Code Ann. § 14-14-502 (a)(1) (Repl. 1998), the quorum court is vested with the legislative power of the county.”

Pulaski Cnty. v. Jacuzzi Bros. Div., 875 S.W.2d 496 (Ark. 1994). · cites it 2× “As the emergency clause to the act notes, Amendment 55 “caused major changes in the structure of county government and because of said changes a need exists to modernize laws affecting county government.”

Crawford Cnty., Arkansas v. Jones, 209 S.W.3d 381 (Ark. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “Ark. Code Ann. § 14-14-502 (a)(1) (Repl. 1998).”

In re Special Task Force- proposed amend. to Ark. R. Civ. P. 3, 2014 Ark. 343 (Ark. 2014). · cites it 2× “The term “clerk of the court” as used in these rules means the circuit clerk and, with respect to probate matters, any county clerk who serves as ex officio clerk of the probate division of the circuit court pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 14-14-502 (b)(2)(B). In counties where the…”

Chaney Taylor, in His Off. Capacity as Indep. Cnty., Arkansas, Dist. Court Judge v. Indep. Cnty., Arkansas, Judge Robert Griffin, in His Off. Capacity as Indep. Cnty. Judge, 2026 Ark. App. 54 (Ark. Ct. App. 2026). · cites it 6× “Ark. Code Ann. § 14-14-502 (Repl. 2013). District Judge Taylor first argues that the Independence County Court (County Court) lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to enter Order 21-40.”

Frank Robinson v. White Cnty., AR, 452 F.3d 706 (8th Cir. 2006). “55, §§ 3, 5; Ark. Code Ann. § 14-14-502 (b)(2)(A)(i). However, while titled Judge, Judge Parish had no judicial duties, see Ark.”

In re Ark. Rule of Civ. P. 3, 2015 Ark. 89 (Ark. 2015). · cites it 2× “The term “clerk of the court” as used in these rules means the circuit clerk and, with respect to probate matters, any county clerk who serves as ex officio clerk of the probate division of the circuit court pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 14-14-502 (b)(2)(B). In counties where the…”

— Ark. Code Ann. § 14-14-502(a)(1) — 1 case

Davis v. Fulton Cnty., Ark., 884 F. Supp. 1245 (E.D. Ark. 1995). “55; Ark.Code Ann. § 14-14-502 (Michie 1987), thus it likewise benefits from any immunity afforded by § 21-9-301, 21 cf.”

— Ark. Code Ann. § 14-14-502(b)(2)(B) — 1 case

Helena Reg'l Med. Ctr. v. Wilson, 207 S.W.3d 541 (Ark. 2005). “3 (2004), the term “clerk of the court” means “the circuit clerk and, with respect to probate matters, any county clerk who serves as éx officio clerk of the probate division of the circuit court pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 14-14-502 (b)(2)(B).” Similarly, even if we were to…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.