Case law

Whiting v. Beebe

7 Ark. 421 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 15, 1851

Humphries, whilst the later cases in Michigan and Tennessee in qualified terms, but in each case the qualification grows out of an effort to discriminate between absolute and qualified satisfaction, which they concede to … These authorities, we think, clearly establish the following positions : First, That the institution of the suit (particularly where it relates to the title or disposition of property) is constructive notice to all purchasers

Arkansas State Highway Commission v. Lemley

254 Ark. 724 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 25, 1973

We held that this testimony was clearly contrary to the established rule which we reiterated to be as follows: “ ‘The rule is firmly established that the price paid by a condemnor is inadmissible in establishing the fair … THE COURT: Let’s back up and get your history of the production and further qualify him. MR. GORDON: That is my qualification.

Smith v. Pavan

505 S.W.3d 169 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 8, 2016

Experience has established that the public will benefit if the judge obeys them. … In the words of Justice Frankfurter, Judges as persons, or courts as institutions, are entitled to no greater immunity from criticism than other persons or institutions.

Turner v. State

224 Ark. 505 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 24, 1955

The motion states that there are facts material to the defense which could be established if given further time; but the motion does not mention specifically any fact that could be established if given additional time. … If the court is of the opinion that there is reasonable grounds for believing he is insane, the question of his insanity shall be determined by a jury of twelve qualified jurors,' etc. Kirby's Dig. § 2440.

Rhea v. State

104 Ark. 162 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 29, 1912

The court must ascertain the primary facts relative to their admissibility and become satisfied that the requisite predicate has been established. … This is clearly the law, and we do not think that the court erred in giving the above instruction. People v. Sweeney, 133 N. Y. 609 ; Remsen v. People, 43 N. Y. 6 .

Independent Insurance Consultants, Inc. v. First State Bank

253 Ark. 779 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 15, 1973

before the court, as a necessity to a final decree, upon certain particular conceded or established rights, either in or springing out of the matters before the court. … I submit that the order on motion for summary judgment qualified as appealable on both its termination of a distinct and severable branch of the case, i.e., the cause of action on the $21,000 check, and its operation to put

Ratton v. Busby

230 Ark. 667 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 25, 1959

Where the law has been clearly and adequately stated in a positive manner, ordinarily the Court need not instruct in a negative form. 88 C. J. S. 820 “Trial” § 303. II. … The appellant concedes the witness’ qualifications to testify as a mechanic; but insists that he is not qualified to testify as to “stresses, strains, and strength of materials”.

In re Comm. on Civ. Practice

2016 Ark. 29 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 28, 2016

The amendment reflects more clearly the actual practice envisioned by the Reporter’s Notes to the original version of the rule. … Certified mail meets these requirements and is most often used, while other forms of mail that qualify are not well-suited for service of process.

Lindsey v. Rottaken

32 Ark. 619 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 15, 1878

Before the city-council are authorized to borrow money,'as herein provided, they shall submit the question to the qualified voters of the city, etc. at an election, etc. … The issue of the notes in question was clearly in violation of this law. * * * “But the charter of the City of Richmond has been referred to for the purpose of showing that the common council had power to issue such notes

Sosebee v. County Line School District

320 Ark. 412 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 8, 1995

That case clearly holds that Ark.R.Civ.P. 41(b) pertaining to nonsuits is inapplicable to appeals from municipal court to circuit court. … An administrative appeal does not qualify.

In re Amends. to Ark. R. Prof'l Conduct

2014 Ark. 316 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 26, 2014

[2] The definition of the practice of law is established by law and varies from one jurisdiction to another. … [7] Letters of solicitation and their envelopes should be clearly marked “Advertisement.”

Ghegan & Ghegan, Inc. v. Barclay

345 Ark. 514 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 9, 2001

We review decisions of the chancery court de novo, but we do not set aside findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous. E.g., Wisener v. Burns, 345 Ark. 84 , 44 S.W.3d 289 (2001) (citing Kinghorn v. … In the case before us, the chancellor concluded that "administrative convenience" qualified as a rational basis for treating the taxation of syrup, powder, and soft drinks differently: Clearly, the legislature could have

Lake View School District No. 25 v. Huckabee

358 Ark. 137 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Sep 9, 2004

In addition, Act 1192 of the Regular Session establishes the Arkansas Distance Learning Development Project, which affords students a more enriched curriculum when qualified teachers and courses are not available in the particular … The special masters' report and the majority court's June 18, 2004, opinion clearly set out what deficiencies need to be resolved to bring our education system into compliance with the State's constitution.

Walker v. Arkansas State Board of Education

365 S.W.3d 899 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 3, 2010

The Parents respond that all that was required of them to establish an injury under the APA was a showing that the agency’s act had a prejudicial impact on them. … Moreover, before the circuit court, the Parents clearly presented their constitutional claim, arguing that We’re making a claim essentially based on Article XIV, Section 1, Article II, Sections 2, 3, and 8 of the Arkansas

Amalgamated Clothing & Textile Workers Intl. Union v. Earle Industries, Inc.

318 Ark. 524 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 7, 1994

The union established a picket line at one of the engineering company's plants. … A 45-minute rally during the lunch hour, even with all the attendant circumstances, simply does not qualify.

Griffen v. Arkansas Judicial Discipline & Disability Commission

355 Ark. 38 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 20, 2003

We have already established in this opinion that safeguarding an independent judiciary as contemplated by Canon 4C(1) is a compelling state interest. … The Commission was clearly wrong in dismissing the Canon 2(B) claim.

Ark. State Highway Comm. v. Union Planters Natl. Bank

231 Ark. 907 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 28, 1960

There is an abundance of substantial testimony, given by qualified expert witnesses, that the Woollards' total severance damages will materially exceed the jury's verdict. … The opinion clearly states that it was planned to build a parkway down the middle of the two strips from which dirt would be taken to be used as fills for the concrete strips.

Dennis v. State

503 S.W.3d 761 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 17, 2016

Here, weeks before trial, Faretta clearly and unequivocally declared to the trial judge that he wanted to represent himself and did not want counsel. … Dennis clearly indicated that he wanted to take over his capital-murder trial. The circuit court, however, went beyond making sure that Mr.

Ligon v. Stilley

371 S.W.3d 615 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 4, 2010

Because the special judge’s findings are not clearly erroneous, we adopt them in full. … If you don’t, then I am not sure you are qualified to be in | fiSthis Court anyway. At the conclusion of the hearing, Judge Shirley announced from the bench that he was denying Stilley’s Motion.

Teston v. ARK. STATE BD. OF CHIROP. EXAM.

206 S.W.3d 796 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 7, 2005

Similarly, the construction of a state statute by an administrative board or agency will not be overturned unless it is clearly wrong. Thomas v. Arkansas Dep't of Human Servs., 319 Ark. 782 , 894 S.W.2d 584 (1995). … This court firmly established the rules governing the raising and developing of constitutional arguments before an administrative agency in AT & T Communications of the Southwest, Inc. v.