Case law

McCoy v. Department of Housing and Urban Development

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Dec 4, 2019

“Although employment discrimination cases are ‘often fact intensive and dependent on nuance in the workplace, they are not immune from summary judgment.’” Trierweiler v. … To establish a prima facie case of disparate treatment, a plaintiff must demonstrate that he or she: (1) has a disability; (2) is a qualified individual; and (3) has suffered an adverse employment action because of that

Hayes v. United States

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jan 31, 2020

Hence, the risk of toxicity and severe treatment related illness would have clearly outweighed the potential benefit for Mr. Bealer (Id.). … The burden then shifts to the nonmoving party to establish that there is a genuine issue to be determined at trial. Prudential Ins. Co. v.

Stephens, Inc. v. United States

321 F. Supp. 1159 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Oct 15, 1970

Such inventory treatment of securities is authorized by section 471 of the Internal Revenue Code provided that the taxpayer qualifies as a “dealer in securities” as that term is defined in Income Tax Regulations, section … The burden is on the plaintiff to establish the liquidation which it postulates. In Pridemark, Inc. v.

Adcock v. Saint Jean Industries Inc

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 11, 2022

Some older precedent obligates the movant to clearly establish the absence of disputed material facts and the entitlement to judgment on the law. E.g., Porous Media Corp. v. … Some decisions emphasize a similarity point: later conduct doesn’t qualify as continuing the hostile work environment if that conduct is different than the earlier harassment.

Green v. Payne

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · May 3, 2022

Green clearly had the capability of diligently pursuing his federal rights as well. While he exhausted his state remedies, Mr. … As such, this does not qualify as new reliable evidence; therefore, Mr. Green’s Petition must be dismissed as untimely. I.

Armstrong v. University of Arkansas at Little Rock

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Aug 29, 2023

To establish a prima facie case of retaliation, Armstrong must show that: (1) she engaged in protected conduct; (2) she suffered a materially adverse employment action; and (3) retaliation for the protected conduct … Although these are clearly materially adverse employment actions, the record does not show that they were taken in response to the Title IX complaint.

Harvey v. Social Security Administration

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Aug 20, 2024

Harvey’s clearly established pace problem. On this record, the ALJ provided insufficient analysis of Mr. Harvey’s pace limitations. Ms. Barney testified at the hearing about Mr. … Harvey’s receipt of benefits, but they appear to be unrelated to him actually qualifying for benefits. Considering these issues along with the nominal assessment of Mr.

Breshears v. Little Rock, City of

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jun 25, 2020

Powell, the Eighth Circuit determined that the district court’s finding of adverse employment action was not clearly erroneous because the evidence established that the transfer position was more saturated and therefore … Officer Breshears failed to establish a prima facie case of retaliation.

Fort v. Grant Garrett Excavating Inc

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Feb 6, 2023

Fort clearly satisfies the first and third elements of her prima facie case. No one disputes that Ms. Fort is Black.175 Nor does anyone dispute that Ms. … Fort to show that, setting aside GGE’s reasons for firing her, she was otherwise qualified and meeting GGE’s expectations. Under this formulation, Ms. Fort was qualified for her position at GGE. Ms.

Libertarian Party of Arkansas v. Thurston

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jul 3, 2019

state or 10,000 signatures of qualified electors, whichever amount was lesser. … The Citizens To Establish a Reform Party in Arkansas court concluded that the January deadline for filing a new political party petition required strict scrutiny and that the Arkansas Secretary of State failed to establish

Patterson v. Masem

594 F. Supp. 386 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Sep 13, 1984

The play clearly reflects a separation of black and white relationships through the casting. … (The play participants didn’t believe this was advisable) 4) An advisory committee would be established to screen productions to avoid future problems of a similar nature.

Goins

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 16, 2026

The vocational expert testified that Goins was qualified for jobs that existed in significant numbers in the national economy (Id., at 27, 70–74). … The ALJ’s decision, however, clearly states: At the hearing, [Goins] testified that he has pain in his joints.

Flowers v. American National Property and Casualty Company

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Sep 30, 2020

Flowers cites also fail to establish bad faith. The only fact directly related to ANPAC’s general practices is Mr. Buff’s statement that “ANPAC generally handled Ms. … evaluated Plaintiff’s claim improperly, which constitutes defective performance under the insurance policy, and gives rise to tort liability for negligent-wrongful action.”89 The Arkansas Supreme Court, however, has clearly

Wainwright v. Norris

872 F. Supp. 574 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Sep 29, 1994

The evidence establishes that Dennis Leeper did one of two things. … The Arkansas Supreme Court held: From these facts, we conclude the appellant failed to establish a prima facie case, but even if he had done so, the state clearly offered a neutral explanation for challenging Mrs.

Stofer v. James Greene & Associates Inc

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 25, 2021

Department of Labor and federal precedent established under the [FLSA] in interpreting and applying the provisions of the Act and Rule 010.14-100 through -113, except to the extent a different interpretation is clearly … Stofer was involved in establishing Territory Manager’s annual goals, which impacted their compensation.

Roberts v. Payne

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

Section 2254(d)(1) states that a federal court may grant a writ of habeas corpus if the state court’s decision “was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by … Taylor, 529 U.S. 362 (2000), a state court acts contrary to clearly established federal law if it applies a legal rule that contradicts the Supreme Court’s prior holdings or if it reaches a different result from one of that

Norris

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Nov 18, 2025

Additionally, they have specialized training and expertise that make them qualified to render their opinions regarding the claimant's mental impairments. … Norris clearly suffers from some degree of physical and mental limitations from the combination of her impairments.

United States v. Vertac Chemical Corp.

33 F. Supp. 2d 769 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Oct 23, 1998

In 1983, EPA placed the site on the National Priority List (NPL) of Superfund cleanup sites established pursuant to Section 105 of CERCLA. … That standard is clearly spelled out in the CERCLA statute.

Carlton v. JHook Investments Inc

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Sep 30, 2019

Department of Labor and federal precedent established under the [FLSA] in interpreting and applying the provisions of the [AMWA] . . . except to the extent a different interpretation is clearly required.”). … Neither party cites the Court to any precedent determining whether tow companies have a “retail concept” and qualify as “retail or service establishment.”

Wilson v. Arkansas Department of Human Services

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jul 16, 2025

That certainly qualifies as more than an “insubstantial or minor difference” in job duties. See Hunt, 282 F.3d at 1030. Beyond this, the record also provides a laundry list of job duties assigned to Mr. … That clearly constitutes significantly unequal work. No reasonable jury could find that Mr. Messer and Ms. Wilson performed equal work during Mr.