Case law

Allen v. Tobacco Superstore, Inc.

375 F. Supp. 2d 796 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jun 16, 2005

She was clearly less qualified than Allen. Her application does not even indicate whether she graduated high school. She had worked six months as a bookkeeper/sales person at a hardware store. … More incredible is the failure of TSI to promote clearly highly qualified black individuals, such as Darrough and Allen, who were loyal and trustworthy employees while searching out less qualified white individuals, some

Harpole v. Entergy Arkansas, Inc.

197 F. Supp. 2d 1152 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 26, 2002

The Plan language quoted above clearly gives the Benefits Committee discretionary authority to determine if the appropriate party has been paid the Plan benefits. … Plaintiffs clearly had no vested rights at the time he submitted the beneficiary change form.

Taylor v. Jones

495 F. Supp. 1285 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Aug 8, 1980

The defense witnesses, moreover, though they talked a good deal about internal complaint procedures, were never able to describe clearly what those procedures were. … . § 1988 does not waive the sovereign immunity of the United States. NAACP v. Civiletti, 609 F.2d 514 (D.C. Cir. 1980), cert. denied,-U.S.-, 100 S.Ct. 3012 , 65 L.Ed.2d-(1980).

Sherpell v. Humnoke School District No. 5

750 F. Supp. 971 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Oct 17, 1990

The message in Baldwin is clearly “[procedural requirements established by Congress for gaining access to the federal courts are not to be disregarded by courts out of a vague sympathy for particular litigants.” … She was only qualified to teach in grades 1-6. She does not have the proper certification to teach in kindergarten nor in special education. And this clearly was the honest understanding of both the Board and Mr.

McFadden v. Watson

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Sep 22, 2025

The Court’s assessment of the qualified immunity issue follows a two-part inquiry. … Further, the Court rejects any suggestion by defendants that the law on excessive force applicable to Officer Watson’s conduct and by which entitlement to qualified immunity is measured was not clearly established at the

United States v. Bailey

666 F. Supp. 1275 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Aug 21, 1987

The statute itself includes expansive categories so as to clearly include attorney's fees as being subject to forfeiture. As stated in United States v. … The Court agrees with the Government that the following principles were established in One Parcel of Land .

Muhummad v. Cobbs

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jan 10, 2023

At the absolute minimum, the officers would be shielded by qualified immunity because their actions did not violate any clearly established law. 1. Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 39) is GRANTED. 2.

Bailey v. Henslee

184 F. Supp. 298 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · May 26, 1960

It is established that prior to 1956 in several of the years Negroes were called on such special panels. … The relevance of jury discrimination, if any, in the civil divisions to petitioner’s case is not established. D.

Radford v. Byers

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 29, 2024

Captain Davis is entitled to qualified immunity. 12 August 2020 Incident. … For all these reasons, Sergeant Brewer is also entitled to qualified immunity. 4.

Parker v. Lockhart

797 F. Supp. 718 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jul 7, 1992

The Ar *719 kansas Supreme Court reversed his conviction because that statute could not be construed to encompass the facts established at Parker’s trial. 1 Parker v. … In that case, the court clearly disavowed any notion that its earlier opinion was based upon the failure of the state to prove its case.

Brazil v. Arkansas Department of Human Services

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Sep 24, 2020

Williams is less qualified than her.3 Further, Plaintiff alleges that another younger and less qualified person, Elmira McCastle was placed in an Administrative Analyst position. … Even if Plaintiff were able to establish a prima facie case, the Defendants’ state reason of placing Ms.

Ward v. Arkansas State Police

539 F. Supp. 1116 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · May 24, 1982

Clearly the plaintiff has failed to sustain this ultimate burden of proof or persuasion. 5. … Unquestionably, Plaintiff was not qualified for the position. 6.

Marchant v. City of Little Rock, Ark.

557 F. Supp. 475 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Feb 22, 1983

If these individuals had been sued by the plaintiff, based on the proof adduced in this case, they would have been entitled to qualified immunity as prison officials. Procunier v. … Butler, supra (rabid bat case) where the Eighth Circuit held that prison officials were entitled to good faith immunity in a negligence action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 .

United States v. Shauver

214 F. 154 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · May 25, 1914

Massachusetts, a statute of Massachusetts regulating the fishing of menhaden in Buzzard’s Bay was involved, and it was there held: “We think it must be regarded as established that, as between nations, the minimum limit of … Even after the game has been reduced to possession there is but a qualified ownership in it, subject to the control of the state. Phelps v. Racey, 60 N. Y. 10 , 19 Am. Rep. 140 ; Commonwealth v.

James v. Cheatdum

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Sep 12, 2019

Defendants contend that Officer Cheatham is entitled to summary judgment on all claims against him or, in the alternative, to qualified immunity on Mr. … To overcome the defense of qualified immunity, Mr.

Parker Ex Rel. Parker v. Fry

323 F. Supp. 728 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jan 28, 1971

On September 23, 1970, he filed this suit seeking to enjoin deprivation under color of state law of plaintiff’s rights, privileges and immunities under the Constitution of the United States. … He testified that he believed that Jesus had worn short hair and was clean shaven and, in effect, that this was a rule that God established. Mr.

May v. Tims

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Feb 22, 2023

Speculative 5 Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … , was that right clearly established at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct.

Nash v. Little Rock Housing Authority

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Sep 20, 2021

raise broad immunity concepts and federal statutes to meet their burden of establishing a colorable federal defense. … This may be true, but the problem for Defendants is that this qualified privilege is a creature of Arkansas state law. Defendants also assert a right to immunity. Id. at 10.

Morens v. Dunkin

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Nov 2, 2023

immunity. … And the Court will revisit the issue of qualified immunity based on the jury’s answers.

Anderson v. Driskill

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jul 26, 2021

This case also implicates qualified immunity. … in granting Braathen qualified immunity.