{
  "id": 1893418,
  "name": "New Home Sewing Machine Co. v. Fletcher, Sheriff and Collector",
  "name_abbreviation": "New Home Sewing Machine Co. v. Fletcher",
  "decision_date": "1884-11",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "139",
  "last_page": "140",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "44 Ark. 139"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "39 Ark., 412",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1898683
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/39/0412-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 132,
    "char_count": 1512,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.458,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.571619782098815e-07,
      "percentile": 0.8162939229275529
    },
    "sha256": "5444feac4d33153b3ebd4a0f269301de04ba06bee7827887c7c80c1f3b583094",
    "simhash": "1:9e37aeb0b782467c",
    "word_count": 244
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T16:40:20.267089+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "New Home Sewing Machine Co. v. Fletcher, Sheriff and Collector."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Cockrill, C. J.\nThe New Home Sewing Machine Company, a foreign corporation doing business in this State, sought to enjoin the sheriff and collector of Pulaski county from demanding of its agents the license tax imposed on sewing machine companies and their agents by section 4 of the revenue act of 1888, and from prosecuting them in the criminal courts for violating its provisions-. M. W. Shaw joined in the complaint with the company, alleging that he .was a merchant selling machines, nut as agent but for profit, as other merchandise is sold. The Chancellor dismissed the complaint.\nThis was correct. The company is liable to the payment of the license tax (Baker v. State, ante, 134), and Shaw can make his defense at law, when he is proceeded against for a violation of the statute. Chancery courts will not interfere by way of injunction to prevent anticipated criminal prosecutions. Waters Pierce Oil Co. v. Little Rock, 39 Ark., 412.\nAffirm.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Cockrill, C. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Sill for appellant.",
      "jD. W. Jonqs, Attorney General, contra."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "New Home Sewing Machine Co. v. Fletcher, Sheriff and Collector.\n1. Taxes: JLicense: Sewing machine, companies.\nSewing machine companies incorporated in other States, and doing business in this State, and their agents, are liable to the license tax imposed by section 4 of revenue act of 1883.\n2. Injunction: None against criminal prosecutions.\nChancery will not interfere by injunction to prevent anticipated criminal prosecutions.\nAPPEAL from Pulaski Chancery Court.\nHon. D. W. Carroll, Chancellor.\nSill for appellant.\njD. W. Jonqs, Attorney General, contra."
  },
  "file_name": "0139-01",
  "first_page_order": 155,
  "last_page_order": 156
}