Case law

James v. James

215 Ark. 509 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 13, 1949

Wood v. Wood, 100 Ark. 370 , 140 S. W. 275 ; Womack v. Womack, 73 Ark. 281 , 83 S. W. 937, 1136 ; O’Hair v. O’Hair, 76 Ark. 389 , 88 S. W. 945 ." … Simpson v. Thayer, supra.

Simonetti v. Brick

266 Ark. 551 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 1, 1979

On August 26 leave to amend was denied by Judge Brown. … Cowger v. Mathis, 255 Ark. 511 , 501 S.W. 2d 212 (1973); McClendon v. McKeown, 230 Ark. 521 , 323 S.W. 2d 542 (1959). We explained the underlying reason for the rule in Jones v.

Rodriquez v. State

262 Ark. 659 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 16, 1978

The second was a brown car, pulling a U-Haul trailer and being driven by the appellant, who appeared to be a Mexican. … Upon that issue we fully agree with the position taken by the New York Court of Appeals in a similar case, People v.

Rice v. School District No. 20

109 Ark. 125 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 14, 1913

School District v. Bennett, 52 Ark. 511 ; Alex Marr v. School Dist. No. 27, Cleburne County, 107 Ark. 305 , 154 S. W. 944 . … A very similar question arose in the case of School District No. 49, Faulkner Co., v.

Lindquist v. State

213 Ark. 903 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 11, 1948

Some of its provisions were construed in Stroud v. Crow, 199 Ark. 814 , 136 S. W. 2d 1025 . … Section 1 bars from examination any person who has not presented to the licensing board ... a certificate of ability in the basic science subjects issued by the State Board of Examiners [in the basic sciences]; but that Board

Goode v. Goode

286 Ark. 463 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 15, 1985

We noted and followed this language from In re Marriage of Brown, 15 Cal.3d 838 , 126 Cal.Rptr. 633 , 544 P.2d 561 (1976): "... the defining characteristic of an expectancy is that its holder has no enforceable right to his … It might be argued that pension cases such as Day v. Day, supra , Gentry v. Gentry, 282 Ark. 413 , 668 S.W.2d 947 (1984), and Morrison v.

Vaught v. Frey

219 Ark. 525 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 12, 1951

No appeal was taken from the Board’s finding that a majority of electors had signed the petition. In the case of Pharr v. Knox, 145 Ark. 4 , 223 S. … In Pharr v.

William W. Cohen & Co. v. Austin

172 Ark. 723 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 31, 1927

W. 654 ; Mullinix v. Hubbard, 6 Fed. (2d) 109; Browne v. Thorn, 272 Fed. 950 . … Clews v. Jamison, supra; Browne v. Thorn, supra. The ease was properly submitted to the jury, and the evidence was sufficient to sustain the verdict. Affirmed.

Washington Street Property Owners Ass'n v. City of Camden

263 Ark. 649 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 12, 1978

This case is a sequel to Lindsey v. City of Camden, 239 Ark. 736 , 393 S.W. 2d 864 (1965). … The subsequent action by the Board, with full knowledge of the Commission’s error in recommending approval, cured any defect. N. Texas Utilities Co. v. Community Natural Gas Co., supra.

Hudgens v. Taylor

206 Ark. 507 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 13, 1943

Cribbs v. Walker, 74 Ark. 104 , 85 S. W. 244, at p. 255 ; Fine v. Lasater, 110 Ark. 425 , 161 S. W. 1147 , Ann. Cas. 1915C, 385; and Brown v. Brown, 134 Ark. 380 , 203 S. … It is stated thus, in Rushton v. McIllvene, 88 Ark. 299 , 114 S.

McHughes v. Wayland

572 S.W.3d 861 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 9, 2019

Counsel for Ethical Gov't v. Hinchey , 2011 Ark. 533 , 2011 WL 6275291 . … Crocket & Brown, P.A. v. Wilson , 321 Ark. 150 , 158, 901 S.W.2d 826 , 830 (1995).

Missouri Pac. Rd. Co. v. Ross, Admr.

194 Ark. 877 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 25, 1937

There was testimony that, prior to leaving Brown’s house, Ross had been drinking. … Under the rule in Porter v. Scullen, et al., Russell v. St. Louis S. W. Ry. Co., and St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co. v.

Alcoholic Beverage Control Division v. R. C. Edwards Distributing Co.

284 Ark. 336 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 21, 1984

Green v. Carder, 282 Ark. 239 , 667 S.W.2d 660 (1984). In a letter opinion, the trial judge found that the board’s action was arbitrary and capricious. … In Davis v. Smith, 266 Ark. 112 , 583 S.W.2d 37 (1979), we discussed the standard of review for statutes regulating business, an analogous situation.

Roe v. Kiser

62 Ark. 92 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 22, 1896

Lear v. Yarnel, 3 A. K. Marshall (Ky.), 421; Allen v. Hawks, 13 Pick. 79 ; Levy v. Brown, 11 Ark. 16 . In Levy v. … In Trible v.

Wallis v. Magnet Cove Rural Special School District

179 Ark. 729 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 10, 1929

Ct. 319 ), the court, quoting from Hughes v. U. … W. 269 ; Quisenberry v. Davis, 136 Ark. 115 , 206 S. W. 139 ; Howard-Sevier Roacl Imp. Dist. v. Hunt, 166 Ark. 62 , 265 S. W. 517 .

Reeves v. Been

217 Ark. 67 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 10, 1950

See Williams v. State, 160 Ark. 587 , 255 S. W. 314 ; Jewett v. Norris, 170 Ark. 71 , 278 S. W. 652 ; and Scaramuzza v. McLeod, Commissioner of Revenues, 207 Ark. 855 , 183 S. W. 2d 55 . … We recognize the legislative control thus given over matters of education in Little River County Board of Education v. Ashdown Special School District, 156 Ark. 549 , 247 S. W. 70 .

Howard v. Center

326 Ark. 224 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 7, 1996

Lane v. Lane, 295 Ark. 671 , 752 S.W.2d 25 (1988). … Likewise in Brown v. St. Paul Mercury Ins. Co., 292 Ark. 558 , 732 S.W.2d 130 (1987), this court reviewed a case of alleged negligent supervision of a patient.

Pettit v. Thomas

103 Ark. 593 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 27, 1912

Dec. 675 , Magee v. Pacific Improvement Co., 98 Cal. 678 , 35 Am. St. Rep. 199 ; Shultz v. Wall, 134 Pa. St. 263, 19 Am. St. Rep. 686 ; Holstein v. Phillips, (N. C.) 59 S. E. 1057 , 14 L. R. A. (N. S.) 475; Glenn v. … In Bostick v.

Hames v. Cravens

332 Ark. 437 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 9, 1998

Brown v. Tucker, 330 Ark. 435, 438 , 954 S.W.2d 262 (1997) (citations omitted). … See Brown, 330 Ark. at 438 .

State Ex Rel. Robinson, Pros. Atty. v. Crow

211 Ark. 67 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 3, 1947

In Smith v. Hamm, 207 Ark. 507 , 181 S. … We do not think the cases of Melton v. Carter, 204 Ark. 595 , 164 S. W. 2d 453 , and Ritholz v. Ark. State Board of Optometry, 206 Ark. 671 , 177 S. W. 2d 410 , are controlling here.