Case law

Our Community, Our Dollars v. Bullock

452 S.W.3d 552 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 31, 2014

With regard to a county clerk’s certification, section 3-8-205 provides that, “[i]f it is found that thirty-eight percent (38%) of the qualified electors have signed the petition, the county clerk shall certify that finding … We hold that the circuit judge did not clearly err on this issue. Save Energy, 374 Ark. at 437 , 288 S.W.3d at 605-06 . Also, in Mays v.

Hunter v. Summerville

205 Ark. 463 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 1, 1943

I would qualify this by saying that he must make reasonable use of the facilities and rights which are given to him in this way.’ … Cas. 1917D, 642, 13 N.C.C.A. 927), to escape condemnation as arbitrary, capricious, or clearly unreasonable.

Reams v. State

560 S.W.3d 441 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 8, 2018

Stated differently, prejudice is presumed if a fair-cross-section violation is established. … The Supreme Court disagreed, explaining that a right to counsel of choice impacts every stage of the proceedings and thus qualified as a structural error.

Zachary M. Oxley v. Larry Ray Lumpkins

2025 Ark. 98 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 29, 2025

In March, Oxley intervened in the Davises’ divorce, petitioning the circuit court to establish the paternity of MC1. … the natural parent and that preference must prevail unless it is established that the natural parent is unfit.”

Brimer v. State

295 Ark. 20 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 14, 1988

However, she was not permitted to cross-examine the victim about the missing funds which appellant sought to establish were in fact taken by this victim. … Clearly the sentence in this case extended beyond the ten year maximum sentence authorized as punishment for a class C felony.

Cupples Farms Partnership v. Forrest City Production Credit Ass'n

310 Ark. 597 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 12, 1992

Farms, however, failed to establish a right to subrogation; nor was its motion to intervene timely. For these reasons, we affirm the circuit court’s decision. … In sum, Farms claimed an interest in the litigation but does not qualify as a subrogee under these facts. Moreover, the motion to intervene was untimely.

Waters v. Millsap

465 S.W.3d 851 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 18, 2015

The instruments here in question do not qualify as securities under that test. … The instruments in question here do not qualify as securities under that test.”

Sexton v. Brock

15 Ark. 345 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 15, 1854

being used at the option of the taker, may be used by the adverse party, without and against his consent, it would be wholly reversing the rules of examination, and going counter to the reasons on which those rules were established … True, this right of cross-examination, is also at the legist lative will, subject to be regulated and qualified; that, however,, is not the question, but whether it has in fact been done by the-deposition statute.

Johnson's ex'r v. Clark

5 Ark. 321 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 15, 1843

or destroy the terms of the deed, but to establish the fact of a loan; and this fact being established, makes the deed, which would otherwise have been absoluto, a defeasible conveyance. … The absence of a bond or a covenant to repay the money, would not make it the less a mortgage, if it was clearly established to be such, or a loan or security far the payment of a debt. 4 Kent Com. 144.

Arkansas State Highway Commission v. Phillips

252 Ark. 206 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 27, 1972

In Watts, we clearly recognized the right of a litigant to offer evidence to show that his adversary was not producing testimony of expert witnesses consulted by him. In Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. … This method particularly should be available when the party itself is inanimate and cannot be called to establish the facts.

Simpson v. Teftler

176 Ark. 1093 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 16, 1928

The provisions of acts 1867 and 1869, when considered with the Constitution and the township organization law, clearly lead to this conclusion.” Kelley v. Cabu, 112 Ill. 23 , 1 N. E. 167 . … It was a complete act, and went into effect without regard to any election, but it simply provided that, upon the petition of not less than 100 qualified electors of- any one county, the board might call an election of all

Linn v. NationsBank

341 Ark. 57 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 13, 2000

Once the moving party has established a prima facie entitlement to summary judgment, the opposing party must meet proof with proof and demonstrate the existence of a material issue of fact. Id. … P. 41(a) would change the absolute right to a qualified right and create “two types of first-time non-suits: Those that could and those that could not be refiled.” Id. at 145 , 806 S.W.2d at 2 .

Campbell v. State

265 Ark. 77 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 19, 1979

Since it is an affirmative defense, the defendant was required to establish it by a preponderance of the evidence. Ark. Stat. Ann. § 41-601, -110 (Repl. 1977) and commentary. … Appellant’s objection to the trial judge’s questioning of the minister whom appellant sought to qualify as an expert. 16.

Clark v. State

169 Ark. 717 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 2, 1925

It was ordered that the sheriff summon a grand jury of sixteen qualified electors to attend at said special term of the court, that the order for the call be entered of record, and that a certified copy be served upon the … When, on the evidence, the accused is clearly guilty of murder in the first degree, or not guilty, it is not only the right, but the duty, off the court to so instruct the jury.

Cox v. Daniels

374 Ark. 437 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 16, 2008

(a) The General Assembly may enact laws to establish, operate, and regulate State lotteries. … According to Petitioner, casino games, like slot machines and roulette, clearly qualify under the definition of lotteries as “games in which the outcomes are based purely on chance.”

Greene v. State

343 Ark. 526 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 8, 2001

The General Assembly clearly viewed resentencing hearings, following reversal of the initial sentence and remand, to be special proceedings which warranted a more specialized standard for the admission of previous testimony … To the extent Greene is objecting to a death-qualified jury, we have recently rejected that argument as has the United States Supreme Court. See Williams v.

Garrett v. Andrews

294 Ark. 160 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 21, 1987

[Emphasis added] Clearly, the General Assembly intended by § 3-1004(c) to apply the election contest provisions of the Code to all general, special, and primary elections. … Furthermore, the election contest provisions which were established in the old 1935 local option law now clearly conflict with the contest provisions set out in the Code.

Ronning v. State

295 Ark. 228 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 18, 1988

Appellant cites a number of instances in closing argument when the prosecutor allegedly violated the principle established by Griffin v. … The objection, clearly, was to the prosecutor’s argument that Michael Ronning was lying when he told his wife he was at the 76 Truckstop at the time of Diana Hanley’s disappearance.

Bankers' Reserve Life Company v. Crowley

171 Ark. 135 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 17, 1926

Crowley is the duly appointed, qualified and acting administrator of said estate. … allowed to stand upon appeal unless they are clearly against t'he preponderance of the evidence.

Taylor v. Auditor

2 Ark. 174 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 15, 1840

The only additional averments in the declaration, material to be noticed, are, that the plaintiff is the Auditor of Public Accounts of the State of Arkansas, duly elected, commissioned, and qualified, •as the law prescribes … must in our opinion, be admitted that if there is no necessity to mention the co-obligors not sued in the declaration at all, a fortiori any allegation that they have not paid the debt must be unnecessary, and this appears clearly