Case law

Waste Management & Transportation Insurance v. Estridge

363 Ark. 42 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 23, 2005

Co. v. … Hannah, C.J., Brown and Gunter, JJ., dissent.

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.

Melton v. Carter

204 Ark. 595 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 22, 1942

It is feared mere opinion or caprice may control members of the board. … See, also, Schnaier v. Navarre Hotel & Importation Company, 182 N. Y. 83 , 74 N. E. 561 ; People v. Ringe, 197 N. Y. 143 , 90 N. E. 451 , 27 L. R. A., N. S., 528, 18 Ann. Cas. 474. Other decisions are cited.

Arkansas Short Leaf Lumber Co. v. Wilkinson

154 Ark. 455 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 3, 1922

A careful inspection would have detected that splinter in that board. … Hall v. Jones, 129 Ark. 18 -25. There was no prejudicial error in permitting the witnesses to testify that they belonged to the American Hardwood Association. 6.

City of Mena v. Tomlinson Bros.

118 Ark. 166 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 19, 1915

Parker v. Smith, 22 Minn. 218 . … Parker v. Smith, supra; Lord v. City of Anoka, 36 Minn. 176 ; Magneau v. City of Freemont, 27 American State Reports, 436, 9 L. R.

Graham v. State

296 Ark. 400 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 3, 1988

The appellant, as he appeared at the hearing, had brown hair. … At the trial some three days later, the witness said the person he saw at the crime scene had hair that was “blondish brown, brown, dark.” 260 Ark. at 760 , 543 S.W.2d at 936 .

Payne v. Road Improvement District No. 1

149 Ark. 491 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 11, 1921

There was no appeal from that decree, and thereafter the commissioners ordered a new assessment, which was duly made by the board of assessors and reported to the county court. … Co. v. Fort Smith & Van Buren Bridge Dist., 113 Ark. 493 .

Fletcher v. Cherry

207 Ark. 650 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 10, 1944

Assyrian Asphalt Co. v. Kent, 160 Ill. 655 , 43 N. … The Supreme Court of Maryland (Madison v.

McClellan, Mayor v. Stuckey

196 Ark. 816 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 10, 1938

The case of Bush v. Echols, 178 Ark. 507 , 10 S. W. 2d 906 , is contrary to appellants’ contentions. … We said in Bush v.

G.A.C. Trans-World Acceptance Corp. v. Jaynes Enterprises, Inc.

255 Ark. 752 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 17, 1973

In Board of Equalization v. … GEORGE ROSE SMITH and BROWN, JJ., join in this opinion. NOTES [1] Our holdings in such cases as Smith v. Howard, 23 Ark. 203 , and Mandel v.

Crossett Lumber Company v. McCain, Comm. of Labor

205 Ark. 631 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 5, 1943

Ry. v. Cooper, 111 Ark. 91 , 163 S. W. 160 ; Ark. Land & Lbr. Co. v. Secrist, 118 Ark. 561 , 177 S. W. 37 ; Harger v. Harger, 144 Ark. 375 , 222 S. W. 736 ; Harkins v. National Handle Co., 159 Ark. 15 , 250 S. W. 900 .” … Co. v. Phillips.

Gardner v. Goss

147 Ark. 178 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 24, 1921

Counsel for appellant cité the case of Thompson v. Gibbs, 37 S. … This question was thoroughly considered by this court in the recent cases of McClendon v. State, 129 Ark. 286 ; Faucette v. Gerlach, 132 Ark. 58 ; Inland Construction Co. v. Rector, 133 Ark. 277 .

Releford v. Pine Bluff School District No. 3

355 Ark. 503 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 8, 2004

This court first considered this Act in the case of Small v. … of this opinion, the trial court appears to have relied on the case of McGough v.

St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. Fort Smith & Van Buren Railway Co.

104 Ark. 344 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 27, 1912

In Railway Co. v. … Co. v. P. O. & G. R. R.

Hall v. Callaway

94 Ark. 49 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 21, 1910

The act of March 23, 1909, gives to the city council the right to fill all vacancies on such boards. … Board of Directors, etc. v. Moreland, post p. 380. In Morrilton Waterworks Improvement District v.

Arkansas Central Railroad v. Bennett

82 Ark. 393 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 25, 1907

As originally drawn, the charge was that the conductor, knowing that plaintiff was about to board the train, negligently started the train before he could do.so, and thus invited and exposed him to the risk of boarding a … State v. Grand Trunk Ry. Co., 58 Me. 176 ; Parsons v. New York Central & Hudson River Ry. Co., 113 N. Y. 355 ; Hatch v. Philadelphia & R. Ry. Co., 61 Atl. Rep. 480 ; Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Sattler, 90 N. W.

Moore v. Horsley

42 Ark. 163 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 15, 1883

Zachery v. Brown, 17 Ark., 442. Reversed and remanded, with directions to abate the action as premature.

City of Fayetteville v. Carter

52 Ark. 301 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 15, 1889

The City of Burlington v. the Putnam Ins. Co., 31 Iowa, 105, 106 ; Van Hook v. Selma, 70 Ala., 361 ; Van Baalan v. People, 40 Mich., 258 ; in re, Wan Yin, 22 Fed. Rep., 701; Johnson v. Philadelphia, 60 Pa. … Weber, 41 Mo., 547 ; Carrigan v. Gage, 68 Mo., 541 ; the State, ex rel., etc., v. Gas Co., 37 Ohio St., 45 ; Clason v. Milwaukee, 30 Wis., 316 .

Security Life Insurance Co. of America v. Bates

144 Ark. 345 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 7, 1920

In discussing the authority of a general agent in Oak Leaf Mill Co. v. … Brown v. Brown, 96 Ark. 456 .

Hogg v. Thurman

90 Ark. 93 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 29, 1909

Brown the two notes sued on, and these notes were negotiable instruments. … Wayne v. Marcy, 79 Ark. 149 ; Jones v.