Arkansas Department of Economic Development v. The William J. Clinton Presidential Foundation, 364 Ark. 40

216 S.W.3d 119 (2005) · Supreme Court of Arkansas · October 27, 2005 · No. No. 05-104

Summary

The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed a declaratory judgment holding that, under the Arkansas Enterprise Zone Act as it existed when the application was filed, nonprofit entities could qualify for the Arkansas Advantage Program. The court concluded that the William J. Clinton Presidential Foundation qualified as a legitimate business enterprise and met the statutory requirements for a corporate headquarters classification. The court also declined to review the agency’s arbitrary-and-capricious determination because there had been no agency adjudication and the appeal concerned review of the circuit court’s order.

Holdings

  1. The term "legitimate business enterprise" in Ark. Code Ann. § 15-4-1704(a) includes nonprofit businesses. The statute applicable when the Foundation applied did not expressly limit Advantage Program benefits to for-profit businesses.
  2. The Foundation satisfied the requirements of Ark. Code Ann. § 15-4-1704(b)(7): it qualified as a corporate headquarters, had no retail sales to the general public, and projected at least twenty-five new full-time permanent jobs.
  3. The court did not reach the merits of ADED's arbitrary-and-capricious argument because it was reviewing the circuit court's declaratory-judgment decision, not a final agency action.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether a nonprofit entity could qualify as a legitimate business enterprise under Ark. Code Ann. § 15-4-1704(a) of the Arkansas Enterprise Zone Act as it existed when the Foundation applied.
  2. Whether the Foundation qualified under the corporate-or-regional-headquarters classification in Ark. Code Ann. § 15-4-1704(b)(7).
  3. Whether the Supreme Court should review ADED's denial under an arbitrary-and-capricious standard.

Disposition

affirmed

Cases Cited (6)

  • Rice v. Tanner, 363 Ark. 79, 210 S.W.3d 860 (2005)(followed)
  • Rose v. Arkansas State Plant Board, 363 Ark. 281, 213 S.W.3d 607 (2005)(followed)
  • Tony and Susan Alamo Foundation v. Secretary of Labor, 471 U.S. 290, 105 S. Ct. 1953, 85 L. Ed. 2d 278 (1985)(followed)
  • Yamaha Motor Corp., U.S.A. v. Richard's Honda Yamaha, 344 Ark. 44, 38 S.W.3d 356 (2001)(followed)
  • Weiss v. Geisbauer, 363 Ark. 508, 215 S.W.3d 628 (2005)(followed)
  • Cave City Nursing Home, Inc. v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 351 Ark. 13, 89 S.W.3d 884 (2002)(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…