Portis v. Fall

Decided November 15, 1879

Supreme Court of Arkansas · decided 1879-11-15

<p>1. Injunction : Aone against criminal proceedings.</p> <p>A court of equity will not exercise jurisdiction by way of injunction to stay proceedings in any criminal matters, or in any case not strictly of a civil nature.</p>

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““There are, however, eases in which courts of equity will not exercise any jurisdiction by way of injunction to stay proceedings at law. In the first place, they will not interfere to stay proceedings in any criminal matters or in any cases not strictly of a civil nature. As, for instance, they will not grant an injunction to stay proceedings on a mandamus, or an indictment, or an information, or a writ of prohibition. But this restriction applies only to cases where the parties, seeking redress by such proceedings, aro not the plaintiffs in equity; for, if they are, the court possesses power to restrain them personally from proceeding, at the same time upon the same matter of right, for redress in the form of a civil suit and of a criminal prosecution. In such cases the injunction is merely incidental to the ordinary power of the court to impose terms upon parties who seek its aid in furtherance of their rights.” •”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Jacob Hoffman Brewing Co. v. McElligott

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1879-11-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently May 1945

1 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

English, C. J.

¶1William N. Portis was arrested on warrants issued by Benjamin E. Eall, a justice of the peace of Jefferson county, and other magistrates, on charges of violating the law of the state by setting up and exhibiting a gambling device called keno, within the limits of Pine Bluff.

¶2In October, 1877, he filed a bill on the chancery side of the circuit court of Jefferson county, praying an injunction against the prosecutions, and a temporary injunction was granted.

¶3Afterwards a demurrer was sustained to the bill; the injunction dissolved; the bill, dismissed for want of equity, and Portis appealed.

¶4A court of equity will not exercise jurisdiction by way of injunction to stay proceedings in any criminal matters, or in any case not strictly of a civil nature. 2 Story Equity Jurisprudence (12 Ed.), sec. 893; Bispham’s Prin. Equity, sec. 424.

¶5Affirmed.