Case law

Cain v. Carllee

169 Ark. 887 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 23, 1925

Digest, were qualified electors. … As to these latter boxes the court found the facts to be as follows: ‘ ‘ These, by an inspection of the ballots and the evidence of the men who cast them, the fact is established that two votes in each of these precincts

Vaughan v. Parr

20 Ark. 600 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 15, 1859

It seems that the will was admitted to probate in August, 1824, and that one of the executors named therein qualified as such. … Apt words are used to exclude the marital rights of the husband, and the words, “ children she may leave surviving her,” wrhen construed in connection with other expressions contained in the bequest, are clearly words of

Ford Motor Co. v. Washington

431 S.W.3d 210 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 12, 2013

permitting this testimony, the circuit court allowed Ford, on the second day of trial, to be stripped of an entire defense that had been clearly developed throughout the litigation. See Bedell v. … Piziali’s expertise, and he was qualified as an expert in bioengineering. Although the circuit court was “troubled” by these things, the court’s reasoning simply does not support the exclusion of the testimony.

Daley v. Boroughs

310 Ark. 274 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 13, 1992

The record before us presents no basis for Franklin’s assertion that Judge Munson was peculiarly qualified to hear the competency issue and that no special judge could assume that role. … Though suspicions may abound under circumstances of this sort, we cannot say that the special judge clearly erred in his decision.

Byrne v. Weller

61 Ark. 366 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 14, 1895

Maddox, my executor and executrix, to qualify without giving bond or security.” The particular question raised by the demurrer to the complaint is, was the estate of Julia A. … course of personal property, by will, no technical or particular words of conveyance are necessary, and any words denoting the-real intention of the testator will be sufficient, unless they contravene some positive and ■established

Prater v. State

307 Ark. 180 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 11, 1991

DNA IDENTIFICATION The evidence in this case and the holding of cases from other jurisdictions clearly establish that the procedures involved in DNA profile analysis have been widely used in laboratories for research and … In order to establish estimates of probability, the F.B.I. employs a technique called fixed bin analysis.

Mancia v. State

459 S.W.3d 259 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 19, 2015

State, 367 Ark. 84, 238 S.W.3d 52 (2006) (counsel cannot be qualified to represent a client while suffering from an alcohol problem). … The State contends that the record demonstrates that Mancia clearly understood that the minimum sentence was twenty-five years.

Harding Glass Co. v. Moore

230 Ark. 796 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Sep 7, 1959

In view of the unanimity of medical opinion that osteomyelitis will aggravate a liver condition, such as this deceased suffered, it becomes important to establish the time when this deceased contracted osteomyelitis. … All are prominent, and recognized as well qualified; nor are we required to agree with the findings reached by the Commission.

Haase v. Starnes

323 Ark. 263 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 5, 1996

Appellant contends the Act, in its entirety, denies equal protection of the laws to medical-malpractice plaintiffs because it, among many other things, grants medical-care providers immunity from civil "self-incrimination … City of North Little Rock, 228 Ark. 356 , 307 S.W.2d 529 (1957)] case clearly points out that immunity of a charitable corporation for liability for negligence is so thoroughly established in this State that the doctrine

McDonald v. Faulkner

2 Ark. 472 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 15, 1840

From the views entertained of this case, we are clearly of opinion, that the Circuit Court erred in the instructions given to the jury, and for this reason, the defendant’s motion for a new trial ought to have been sustained … one come into our Circuit Court, in the midst of a three weeks session, criminal, common law and chancery cases all progressing on the same day, and observe the course of proceedings in that court, and he will then be. qualified

Fletcher v. Hurdle

259 Ark. 640 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 3, 1976

But the rules there announced clearly apply in this case. See also, Cox v. Danehower, supra. Appellees seize upon 33 Am. … The distinction was clearly made in Wilson v. Pharris, 203 Ark. 614 , 158 S.W. 2d 274 .

McCain v. State

132 Ark. 497 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 11, 1918

particular jurors try his case and his rights were fully protected if he secured a panel, summoned under the orders of the court, who, at the time they were called to answer as to their qualifications, were found to be duly qualified … The concluding remarks of the presiding judge show clearly that he was not expressing an opinion upon the weight of the testimony of those witnesses that he had held to be competent.

Kelley v. Wiggins

291 Ark. 280 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 23, 1987

The clinic and the hospital were immune from suit, so their insurers, appellant Ambassador Insurance Company for the clinic and appellant St. … There was no such tender by the appellants, and there clearly was no acceptance of a tender by the appellees.

Firemen's Insurance Co. v. Little

189 Ark. 640 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Sep 24, 1934

‘‘Whether or not the qualification of a witness with respect to knowledge or special experience is sufficiently established is a matter resting-largely in the discretion of the trial court, whose determination is usually … of the chancellor is clearly against the preponderance of the evidence in this case. • Appellants cite and rely on the case of Springfield Fire & Marine Ins.

Burrow v. State

282 Ark. 479 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 21, 1984

What must be the educational background of the teachers — must they be state certified or may ‘qualified’ persons teach? … In my j udgment Burrow loses because he refuses to conform, thereby threatening the power of the political establishment, and not because he committed a crime.

Sturgis v. Skokos

335 Ark. 41 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 5, 1998

It is well established that the three-year statute of limitations applies to legal malpractice actions. Ragar v. Brown, 332 Ark. 214, 219 , 964 S.W.2d 372, 374 (1998). … Skokos’s claim of immunity with respect to liability for Mr. Coleman’s actions we could not do it on the basis of the case cited. Affirmed.

Ark. Power & Light Co. v. Lantrip

248 Ark. 908 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 8, 1970

Payne was better qualified than Mr. Cox, but it is not our function to determine which witness was better qualified, or which better demonstrated his knowledge of the property under discussion. … The language used by the witness very clearly conveys this impression. For instance, he stated, “well, this part is only affected.

Arkansas-Louisiana Gas Co. v. Campbell

203 Ark. 307 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 8, 1941

All that is required of the party at the outset is to give competent evidence sufficient, if undisputed, to establish the truth of his averments.” 23 C. J., 12, et seq. … The rule is clearly stated by this court in the case of M. & A. Rd. Co. v. Johnson, 115 Ark. 448 , 171 S.

Floyd E. Sagely, Jr. v. Asa Hutchinson, Governor of Arkansas Colonel William J. Bryant, Director of the Arkansas State Police And Brad Cazort, Director of the Arkansas Crime Information Center, in Their Official Capacities

685 S.W.3d 238 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 28, 2024

It is well-established that, “[l]ike most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited.” District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 626 (2008). … Once litigation proceeds against an immune defendant, the defendant loses this protection, regardless of the outcome.

Baker v. Helms

244 Ark. 29 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 5, 1968

Not long after the execution of the deed, the mother and father qualified for welfare grants and E. E. Hodges is still receiving a welfare check. … Hodges, the grantor, testified after the court adjourned to Meadow Lake Nursing Home upon invitation of appellees’ counsel and following testimony by Doyle Hodges that his father could clearly reveal the situation.