Case law

In the Matter of the Guardianship of S.H.

455 S.W.3d 313 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 26, 2015

Failure to accord fit parents a presumption in favor of their decision to terminate a guardianship established by parental consent would penalize their initial decision to establish the guardianship and deter parents from … Code Ann. § 28-65-204 (a) are whether the natural parent is qualified and suitable and what is in the child’s best interest.

Ex parte Allen

26 Ark. 9 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 15, 1870

judicial power of the State shall be vested in the Senate, sitting as a court of impeachment, a Supreme Court, circuit courts, and such other courts, inferior to the Supreme Court, as the General Assembly may from time to time establish … Are these officers not as clearly in aid of the chief executive, as is the tax assessor, coroner, or sheriff?

Davis v. Smith

266 Ark. 112 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 25, 1979

The probate judge clearly recognized that there was a problem connected with the statutory language of the subsection involved. … Parental rights are not immune from interference by the state in its role of parens patriae. Minor Children of F. B. v. Caruthers, 323 S.W. 2d 397 (Mo.App., 1959).

Lawrence v. Jones

228 Ark. 1136 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 5, 1958

Thereafter there was a referendum vote on these two ordinances, at which all qualified electors in the city, whether property owners or not, were allowed to vote, and both, ordinances were approved by a majority of more than … The record clearly shows that the city council of McGehee proceeded here under Act 132 of 1933 (Ark.

Stephens v. Petrino

350 Ark. 268 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 10, 2002

Our standard of review for summary judgment cases is well-established. … However, this court concluded that George had not established that St.

Fretwell v. State

289 Ark. 91 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 19, 1986

Clearly, the giving of the Allen charge was erroneous as it would encourage unanimity and possibly encourage a penalty of death in order to avoid a retrial. … The use of death qualified juries was declared unconstitutional in Grigsby v. Mabry, 569 F. Supp. 1273 (E.D. Ark. 1983).

Hillard v. State

321 Ark. 39 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 12, 1995

Hillard first argues his attorney was not qualified under state law to represent him in a capital murder case. Charles E. … Anderson clearly stated that she gave the officers the right to search Hillard’s as well as her things in the bedroom which they jointly shared.

Galloway v. Darby

105 Ark. 558 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 18, 1912

The rule is established beyond controversy, except where changed by statute, that a legacy or devise lapses when the legatee or devisee dies before the testator. 17 Am. & Eng. … demonstrate clearly that they were meant otherwise than in the technical sense.

Frauenthal v. Slaten

91 Ark. 350 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 12, 1909

It appears clearly that the character of this supervision was for the protection of the public and for the public benefit. … These matters were introduced in evidence as tending to establish the fact that Frauenthal treated the square or park as public property.

Boren v. State

297 Ark. 220 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 5, 1988

This testimony clearly established, with no dispute from appellant, what the lower reading was at the time of sale to appellant’s customers. … This statement is clearly the antithesis of disclosing that there had been an alteration of the odometer.

Fondren v. State

364 Ark. 498 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 5, 2006

There is nothing to indicate that only specified felonies will qualify. Rather, any felony will support a conviction for manslaughter. … Despite these established tenets of statutory construction, the majority in this case affirms a manslaughter conviction *339 based entirely on a felony specifically excluded by the legislature.

Moore v. State

323 Ark. 529 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 19, 1996

Appellant’s Fifth Amendment argument clearly has no merit. … Sligh apparently did not have the education or training to qualify as an expert.

Aaron Spencer v. State of Arkansas

2025 Ark. 91 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 29, 2025

For example, prohibiting the public expression of an opinion as to “the weight, value, or effect of any evidence as tending to establish the guilt or innocence of the [d]efendant” by any public official is clearly overbroad … Public officials aren’t immune from public criticism—judges and prosecutors included.

Hogg v. Jerry

299 Ark. 283 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 26, 1989

Woody, 295 Ark. 168 , 747 S.W.2d 108 (1988), this court was faced with deciding if a person qualified as an agent under Ark. … Hogg and Haines deny the existence of a partnership and the evidence in the record fails to establish that a partnership existed.

Bailey v. Martin

Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 14, 2014

Bailey thus argued that a writ of mandamus was not warranted, as there was no clearly established, undisputed legal right to demonstrate that mandamus should issue. … Similarly, we have held that a party may not utilize the process established in section 7-5-207(b) in a post-election challenge. See Zolliecoffer v.

Utley v. City of Dover

352 Ark. 212 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 13, 2003

Such testimony clearly constitutes a basis for the trial court’s decision on this point. … Von Tungeln on this criteria clearly supports the trial court’s decision; therefore, we cannot say that the trial court’s finding on this point was clearly erroneous. VI.

Brown v. State

330 Ark. 627 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 20, 1997

We emphasized that the ruling in Penn did not open the door to other petitions beyond those which qualified under the facts of that case and which were brought within that narrow window of time in which the judicial system … These traditional grounds for a writ are not subject to the time limitation established in Penn for a third-party confession.

Echols v. State

326 Ark. 917 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 23, 1996

Almost all of the factors clearly weigh in favor of a joint trial. … Peretti was qualified as an expert in forensic pathology without objection.

Lewis v. Smith

198 Ark. 244 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 24, 1939

Section 3 amends § 19 of Art. 7 of the Constitution so that it will read: “The clerks of the circuit courts shall be elected by the qualified electors of the several counties for the term of two years, and shall be ex-officio … The experiment was not satisfactory, and by the Constitution of 1874, the probate court was re-established.

KARK-TV v. Simon

280 Ark. 228 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Sep 12, 1983

Carolyn Long, a reporter for KARKTV, happened to be in another business establishment two doors down. … But the privilege granted in § 611 is qualified and will be lost if abused by failure to give an accurate and fair report under § 611 (f).