Ark. Code Ann. » Title 25 Chapter 16
Arkansas Code Annotated

Ark. Code Ann. § 25-16-703 (2020)

Representation of state interests in federal courts

✓ Arkansas Code release r76: Acts through about 2020 (2021-2025 sessions missing)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaArk. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
  1. The Attorney General shall maintain and defend the interests of the state in matters before the United States Supreme Court and all other federal courts and shall be the legal representative of all state officers, boards, and commissions in all litigation where the interests of the state are involved.
  2. Nothing in this section shall relieve the Attorney General of discharging any and all duties required of him or her under the common law or by any of the statutes of this state, nor shall it relieve the prosecuting attorneys of any duties required of them by the statutes of this state.

History. Acts 1911, No. 131, §§ 2, 6; C. & M. Dig., §§ 4522, 4525; Pope's Dig., §§ 5579, 5582; A.S.A. 1947, §§ 12-706, 12-712.

Case Notes

Attorney General.

Automatic License Plate Reader System Act, § 12-12-1801 et seq., provided for enforcement only through private actions for damages. While the Attorney General may intervene and defend the constitutionality of the Act in a private damages suit, the Attorney General does not initiate enforcement or seek relief against a putative defendant; thus, the companies' injury was “fairly traceable” only to the private civil litigants who may seek damages under the Act and the companies lacked standing to sue the Governor and Attorney General challenging the Act's constitutionality. Digital Recognition Network, Inc. v. Hutchinson, 803 F.3d 952 (8th Cir. 2015).

Jurisdiction.

The chancery court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to issue the writ of mandamus to restrain the counsel for the Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration from representing the State of Arkansas before the United States Supreme Court, the effect of which was to thwart the state's certiorari petition from being docketed in the Supreme Court. Barclay v. Farm Credit Servs., 340 Ark. 65, 8 S.W.3d 517 (2000).

Cited: Holloway v. State Bd. of Architects, 79 Ark. App. 200, 86 S.W.3d 391 (2002).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2000–2022 · leading case: Barclay v. Farm Credit Servs., 8 S.W.3d 517 (Ark. 2000).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Barclay v. Farm Credit Servs., 8 S.W.3d 517 (Ark. 2000). · cites it 5× “In that petition, they prayed that the Pulaski County Chancery Court order DFA to refrain from acting in violation of Ark. Code Ann. § 25-16-703 (a) (Repl. 1996).”
Jernigan v. Crane, 64 F. Supp. 3d 1260 (E.D. Ark. 2014). · cites it 4× “” Ark.Code Ann. § 25-16-703. Plaintiffs sue separate defendant Richard Weiss in his official capacity as Director of the Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration (“DFA”).”
Leslie Rutledge v. Pratt Cates Remmel, 2022 Ark. 86, 643 S.W.3d 5. · cites it 2× “” Ark. Code Ann. § 25-16-703 (a) (Repl. 2014).”
Leslie Rutledge v. Pratt Cates Remmel, 2022 Ark. 86. · cites it 2× “” Ark. Code Ann. § 25-16-703 (a) (Repl. 2014).”
Holloway v. Arkansas State Bd. of Architects, 86 S.W.3d 391 (Ark. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “” Ark. Code Ann. § 25-16-703 (a). In addition to the Attorney General’s role as the State’s principal civil litigator, the Attorney General is obligated to give the governor, secretary of state, state treasurer, members of the general assembly and other state officials, when…”
Stompingbear v. Reed, No. 6:18-cv-06114 (W.D. Ark. Dec. 2, 2020). “Individual Capacity Claims In a section 1983 action, state actors acting in their individual capacities may be entitled to qualified immunity.”
Ark. Code Ann. § 25-16-703(a): 1 case
Barclay v. Farm Credit Servs., 8 S.W.3d 517 (Ark. 2000). “In that petition, they prayed that the Pulaski County Chancery Court order DFA to refrain from acting in violation of Ark. Code Ann. § 25-16-703 (a) (Repl. 1996).”
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.