Case law

Unigard Security Insurance v. Murphy Oil USA, Inc.

331 Ark. 211 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 29, 1998

The record thus clearly establishes that the Alabama jury’s award for compensatory damages was based on a finding that Murphy Oil failed to restore the leased premises to the condition that they were in at the beginning of … Rather, it held that the spill of the chemicals on the lessor’s land was the “occurrence” that qualified for coverage under the insurance policy.

Newman v. State

2014 Ark. 7 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 16, 2014

erroneous or clearly against the preponderance of the evidence. … Clearly, this cannot be the test of competency.

Smith v. Pavan

2016 Ark. 437 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 8, 2016

Experience has established that the public will benefit if the judge obeys them. … Clearly, this fluid situation has caused the facts to change from when the circuit court granted summary judgment until now.

Easley v. Patterson

142 Ark. 52 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 2, 1920

When tested by the language used, it is evident that the power to maintain the roads is as plainly and clearly conferred as is the power to construct them in the first instance. … The words “as herein provided” as clearly and definitely refer to the maintenance of the roads as they do to the construction thereof.

Pulaski County v. Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Inc.

370 Ark. 435 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 20, 2007

A neutral court should be the final arbiter of what qualifies as a public record. … These facts clearly reflect that Quillin was a county employee using a county computer.

Davis v. State

351 Ark. 406 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 9, 2003

However, for clarification of our standard, we take this opportunity to express clearly the appropriate standard for review of a suppression challenge. … This rendition of events hardly qualifies as a "transaction." Other jurisdictions have focused on the failure to observe anything actually exchanged. See People v.

Kemp-Bradford VFW Post 4764 v. Wood

262 Ark. 168 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 18, 1977

The flood of interventions and the abundance of amici curiae clearly show that this remedy would not have been plain or practical. And then, a declaratory judgment is not self-executing. … In § 1, the General Assembly reaffirmed the public policy of the state that the qualified electors of any political subdivision have the right of local option to prohibit the sale or manufacture of intoxicating liquor therein

Escobedo v. Nickita

365 Ark. 548 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 9, 2006

Escobedo clearly does not fall into one of the above-listed categories in section 9-9-207(a). … Thus, the issue of whether a party qualifies as a person required to consent to the adoption pursuant to Ark.Code Ann. § 9-9-206 must be determined prior to the hearing.

Osburn v. State

326 S.W.3d 771 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 25, 2009

He then agreed with Justice Rehnquist’s conclusion that "the facts and circumstances, when viewed in their entirety, clearly establish a valid waiver of the right to counsel.” … Thus, a question or statement which does not invite further interrogation before an attorney is present cannot qualify as "initiation” under Edwards.

George v. State

358 Ark. 269 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 24, 2004

In light of this well-established precedent, we turn our attention to appellant’s sufficiency challenge. … I don’t think they do, because they don’t qualify as a lewd exhibition. It’s the same sort of flashing behavior you see maybe in New Orleans for the Mardi Gras where they toss jewels and silly things like that.

Hempstead v. Watkins

1 Ark. 317 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 15, 1845

The statute extends the original remedy, or so qualifies it that the surety is not bound to show the injury resulting from the subsequent insolvency of the principle to entitle himself to a discharge from his suretyship. … Many of the cases are based upon a peculiar state of facts, which clearly warrant the judgment pronounced upon them.

Clark v. Transcontinental Insurance

359 Ark. 340 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 4, 2004

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 fact. Id. … The statute clearly imposes a duty to inform the electrical utility of actions and work that would bring individuals or items in closer proximity to overhead power lines than ten feet.

Arkansas Department of Veterans Affairs v. Okeke

466 S.W.3d 399 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 18, 2015

is clearly required.” … The national standards were more lax than the regional standards, and the reports led the reps to believe that they would qualify for the bonus even though they were not meeting the higher regional standards.

Chatman v. Millis

257 Ark. 451 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 13, 1975

This court clearly recognized its illness and foresaw its demise in Chapman Chemical Co. v. … It seems to me that the public policy of Arkansas is clearly opposed to the privity requirement where one person suffers as a result of the failure of another to use reasonable care.

Hortonv. City of Paragould

257 Ark. 313 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 2, 1974

Otherwise, the striking of the pleading as a cross-complaint would be clearly proper. … Smith, who claim to be duly elected and qualified members of the Water and Sewer Commission of the City of Paragould pursuant to its ordinance 904.

Hardin v. State

66 Ark. 53 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 17, 1898

The judgment in the Vance case, therefore, is clearly right, irrespective of the question now under consideration. The same thing may be said of the decision in Polk v. State. … We have not set out all the testimony tending to show that the confession of Hardin was made under the influence of a hope of leniency held out to him by the sheriff and others; for this fact is established beyond controversy

Ruiz v. State

273 Ark. 94 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 8, 1981

But all three qualified their responses by saying that they would not vote for the death penalty notwithstanding their willingness to consider it. … State, 259 Ark. 96 , 531 S.W. 2d 474 [1976]), we are not willing to say he is without discretion to excuse a juror on his own where the issue of bias may be more implied than actual even though it does not fall clearly within

Worthington v. Curd & Co.

15 Ark. 491 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 15, 1855

such statutes, irrespective of the law merchant, .have been expounded as statutes of assignments, in Yirginia, Kentucky, and most of the western States, but that it also, at the- same time, adopts the law merchant in a qualified … As to the plea stricken out, and the two additional ones refused to be filed, there is clearly no error.

Rogers v. Diamond

8 Ark. 474 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 15, 1853

Diamond, alleged that, on the 24th of April, 1848, Dennis Griffin made and published his last will and testament, which was exhibited, whereby he and one Boiling were appointed executors, and that Bolling had refused to qualify … The 17th instruction was, in substance, that the testimony of both the subscribing witnesses to the will of 1848, having been adduced in support of it, its due and legal execution must be clearly proved by their testimony

Coulter v. Dodge, Chancellor

197 Ark. 812 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 13, 1939

It, therefore, clearly appears that the measure passed by one house was different from the measure passed by the other house. … A portion of that poem reads: “For thus such reverence is lent To well-established precedent. A moral lesson this might teach, Were I ordained , and called to preach.