Ark. Code Ann. » Title 14 Chapter 50
Arkansas Code Annotated

Ark. Code Ann. § 14-50-101 (2026)

Applicability

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaArk. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
  1. Any city of the first class in this state having a population of twenty thousand (20,000) or more but less than seventy-five thousand (75,000) inhabitants, according to the most recent federal census, may establish or continue a civil service system for the nonuniformed employees of these cities, either by action of the city council or other governing body of the city or by a local initiated measure.
  2. Any civil service system established or continued pursuant to this chapter shall cover such nonuniformed employees of the city as the ordinance establishing or continuing the system shall prescribe.

History. Acts 1963, No. 221, § 1; A.S.A. 1947, § 19-1419.

Publisher's Notes. Acts 1963, No. 221, § 20, provided that the purpose of the act is that it be the only one under which first-class cities with a population of at least 20,000 but less than 75,000 inhabitants can establish a civil service system for nonuniformed employees, and to this end all laws and parts of laws in conflict with the act, including Acts 1939, No. 339, and all amendments thereto, and Acts 1941, No. 61, and all amendments thereto, are repealed.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2008–2020 · leading case: City of Pine Bluff v. S. States Police Benevolent Ass'n, 285 S.W.3d 217 (Ark. 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
City of Pine Bluff v. S. States Police Benevolent Ass'n, 285 S.W.3d 217 (Ark. 2008). · cites it 2× “See Ark. Code Ann. § 14-50-101 (Repl. 1998). Section 14-51-210, which is part of the chapter governing civil service systems for police and fire departments, and which is actually at issue here, is essentially identical to section 14-50-210.”
Harris v. Bradley, Arkansas (W.D. Ark. 2020). “§ 14-50-101 . Because Plaintiff held public elective office and was not subject to any civil service laws, the Court finds that she was not an “employee” of a city, as that term is defined for purposes of the FLSA.”
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.