Case law

Cooper Clinic, P.A. v. Barnes

366 Ark. 533 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 15, 2006

During the trial, Cooper Clinic motioned for a directed verdict at the conclusion of the plaintiffs case, claiming that because the clinic did not qualify as a mandatory reporter under the Child Maltreatment Act, it could … This use would be harmonious with the dictionary definition of institution, “[a]n established organization or foundation, especially one dedicated to education, public service, or culture ...

Gray v. Mitchell

373 Ark. 560 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 29, 2008

In order to qualify, they contend, the payment of funds must be directly and immediately connected with the public school system. … Clearly, any expenditure that meets this requirement will be one that is “for maintenance and operation of the schools.” Ark. Const. art. 14, § 3 (as amended by Ark.

Cuningham v. State

2013 Ark. 304 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Sep 5, 2013

Jurors are presumed unbiased and qualified to serve. Burton v. State, 2011 Ark. 351. … Moreover, appellant fails to establish that he was even prejudiced when the transcript was not admitted because he fails to demonstrate how the alleged disparity in police interview techniques had any relevance to the charges

Lake View School District No. 25 v. Huckabee

364 Ark. 398 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 15, 2005

First, that information is now clearly available. … In conjunction with this, because of changes in counting National School Lunch Act qualifying students and decreasing enrollments in some school districts with a high number of NSLA qualifying students, NSLA funding will

Bunt v. Bunt

294 Ark. 507 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 16, 1988

App. 1983) (court held that even if spouse’s personal injury claim is classified as a property interest, it fails to qualify as marital property because it was not susceptible to division at the time of dissolution); Fries … For example, in the instant case, the appellee has filed no suit, no settlement has been offered and, indeed, no liability against a third-party tortfeasor has been established.

Smith v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance

353 Ark. 188 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 15, 2003

Thus, simple residency would establish coverage and "family" and "resident" would merge; the word "family" would have no independent meaning. … Clearly someone can rent out a room to a boarder, that person "resides in the household" but that person is not an economic unit with their landlord.

Waters v. State

271 Ark. 33 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 10, 1980

We have held that a 21.5 percent disparity is sufficient as a basis for establishing a prima facie case. Hall v. State, 259 Ark. 815 , 537 S.W.2d 155 . … there are in fact any qualified to serve.

Sullivan v. State

163 Ark. 11 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 25, 1924

Thereupon the court ordered the sheriff to summon jurors to become members of the resudar panel, and a sufficient number of persons were called from the special venire and qualified for that purpose so that when the drawing … jury dicl not find that the theory of the defense was true, it is not the province of the court to emphasize the value or relative bearing of any testimony, as this is the peculiar province of the jury, and the jury was clearly

Missouri Pac. R. Co. v. UNITED BRICK & CLAY WKRS. UNION

238 S.W.2d 945 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 23, 1951

Unless pickets could present their message to persons arriving by train such a mill would be immune from the usual means of advertising the existence of a strike. … So I think the Massachusetts and Texas cases are clearly distinguishable. The majority has not mentioned our case of Tomlin v.

Grays v. State

264 Ark. 564 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 13, 1978

Likewise here the Moss Seed Company qualified as an "occupiable structure" within the meaning of the Burglary offense § 41-2002, supra, and there would be no rational basis for the jury to find otherwise. … An offense is so included if: (a) it is established by proof of the same or less than all the elements required to establish the commission of the offense charged; or * * * * * * (c) it differs from the offense charged only

Manila School District No. 15 v. Wagner

357 Ark. 20 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 15, 2004

Finally, the purpose of a writ of mandamus is to enforce an established right or to enforce the performance of a duty. Arkansas Democrat-Gazette v. Zimmerman, 341 Ark. 771 , 20 S.W.3d 301 (2000). … Clearly, the decision of recusal is a discretionary one; as such, neither prohibition, mandamus, or certiorari will lie.

Arthur Murray, Inc. v. Parris

243 Ark. 441 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 13, 1967

We cannot agree that the letters and affidavit established an accord arid satisfaction, and we think a fact question was presented. Mr. Coonrod clearly wrote that Mr. … Parris began her dancing lessons, there were six or seven instructors, and in 1965 (when she ceased taking lessons), there was only one instructor qualified to teach the higher rated students. According to Mr.

Henry v. State

278 Ark. 478 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 28, 1983

This evidence would be used in both trials, as would other acts and evidence, to establish a plan, scheme, motive or state of mind. … Appellant readily admits that we have previously rejected the argument that a death qualified jury is impermissible. Lasley v. State, 274 Ark. 352 , 625 S.W.2d 466 (1981).

Glover v. Henry

231 Ark. 111 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 2, 1959

Act 9 establishes a procedure for the recall of school directors and provides in § 8 that vacancies created under the act are to be filled by the county board of education. … Can the majority say that a school district is not a political subdivision of the state which enjoys the privileges and immunities as such?

Moore v. Gordon

44 Ark. 334 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 15, 1884

The title under which Moore claimed was cognizable at law, and he could not maintain a suit for partition until he had established it at law. … Same: Proof of the contract, First, as to the contract of sale itself, the rule is that it must be clearly proven. Its terms must be definitely shown.

Lambert v. Markley

255 Ark. 851 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 24, 1973

We there held the instruction erroneous, but in doing so we neither added to nor qualified the res ipsa loquitur doctrine. … Even if we assume that the proof shows that the lock washer had been left off the wheel and that caused the wheel to become detached from the truck, that in itself would not establish negligence on the part of appellant.

Moody v. Walker

3 Ark. 147 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 15, 1840

The rule, as above stated, may now be considered as the established law of lhe land; and in Wotten vs. … Rowton, 1 Marshall 515; and Morehead and Brown’s Dig., 560 to 566, clearly establish the distribution of the estate of Nancy Walker, according to the rule here laid down.

Montgomery v. Butler

309 Ark. 491 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 1, 1992

While it is clearly apparent that the instruction does not use the phrase “guilty of medical malpractice,” Dr. … Butler objected on the grounds that the witness had not established the authoritativeness of the study and because opposing counsel wanted to read particular sentences from the lengthy study.

Bell v. State

296 Ark. 458 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 10, 1988

(The entries on the docket sheet clearly establish that hearings were held on some of these motions and the record does contain a transcription of the hearing on the motion to suppress the appellant’s confession.) … The seventh argument is that it was improper to “death qualify” the jury. This issue has been settled adversely to the appellant in the case of Lockhart v. McCree, 476 U.S. 162 , 106 S. Ct. 1758 , 90 L.

Beirne & Burnside v. Imboden

14 Ark. 237 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 15, 1853

Byers, we have held that the objection, for want of authentication, might be taken either by plea, on motion, or by way of objection to the admissibility of evidence offerred to establish the claim. … And there are several other provisions touching exhibition and authentication, which, when all considered together, seem clearly enough to show that the Legislature used as synonymous the terms, “ creditor” and “ claimant