Case law

Tapp v. Ligon

441 S.W.3d 4 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Sep 18, 2014

Continuing with Turner as her lawyer, on March 13, 2007, an Agreed Order was entered establishing Schmidt’s paternity of K.S. and setting a hearing for August 30, 2007, on all other issues. … Pursuant to the Procedures, conduct involving deceit or misrepresentation qualifies as “serious misconduct.” Id. § 17(B)(3). Moreover, Tapp has a disciplinary record with the Committee.

Johnson v. Missouri Pacific Railroad

149 Ark. 418 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 4, 1921

King at first denied that she wrote the letters, but later, when they were presented to her on cross-examination, she qualified this statement by saying that she did not remember whether she had written them or not. … cause with reasonable diligence, for that is clearly tbe measure of an attorney’s duty to bis client.

Leep v. Railway Co.

23 L.R.A. 264 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 3, 1894

They clearly come within the power of the legislature to protect the rights of persons, prevent wrongs, and enforce honesty and fair dealing in the transactions of individuals. … Such an amendment of the charters of corporations is clearly unjust to the corporators. The other construction' is more reasonable-.

Citicorp Industrial Credit, Inc. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

305 Ark. 530 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 20, 1991

Clearly, our case law establishes that foreign corporations do not become Arkansas residents by registering to do business here, and they are, therefore, entitled to the thirty days to respond to a complaint provided by Rule … However, it is in this “equal protection” argument that Wal-Mart cites the practice of attorneys in the Benton County Circuit Court of allowing foreign corporations qualified to do business in this state only twenty days

Rosenbaum v. State

131 Ark. 251 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 10, 1917

Therefore, whether the Christian Sabbath be considered as a matter of human or divine origin, we have it established as a potent factor of history with a clear interpretation by him in whose memory it was established as to … The qualifying word “daily” is significant of the kind of necessity. It must be such as is required to meet a daily need.

Southwestern Transportation Co. v. King

240 Ark. 309 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 21, 1966

Ann. § 73-1762 (Repl. 1957) provides in part: “(a) Subject to the provisions of this Act, a certificate shall be issued to any qualified applicant therefor, authorizing the whole or any part of the operations covered by the … Here, all three factors have been shown; so public convenience and necessity have been clearly established. Affirmed.

Hackler v. Baker

233 Ark. 690 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 29, 1961

This contention is based on the wording in § 1 of the Amendment which reads: “Any city of the first or second class, any incorporated town, and any county, may issue, by and with the consent of the majority of the qualified … liberally construing the provisions of Amendment No. 49 (if a liberal construction is required) to effectuate its acknowledged purpose, we are following the well recognized rule of constitutional interpretation as it is clearly

Malvern Gravel Co. v. Mitchell

238 Ark. 848 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 21, 1964

That the Malvern Gravel Company is the same as the Malvern & Ouachita River Railroad is abundantly established from the evidence. … On January 21, 1932, Malvern Gravel Company became a Delaware corporation and on January 25, 1932, it qualified to do business in Arkansas, and has so remained.

Strawhacker v. State

304 Ark. 726 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 4, 1991

The photographs introduced in this case easily qualify under the Richmond, Earl, and Cash standards. … An offense is included within another offense, if it is established by proof of the same or less than all the elements required to establish the commission of the other offense. Id.

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. P.O. Market, Inc.

347 Ark. 651 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 14, 2002

The article described a new program established by Sam’s Club which allowed bulk purchasers to buy goods on credit. … GECC had been interested in establishing such an arrangement with Wal-Mart for a number of years.

Beebe v. Fountain Lake School District

365 Ark. 536 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 9, 2006

The General Assembly’s legislation permitting excess debt service millage is clearly contrary to the plain meaning of Amendment 74. Lake View, 351 Ark. 31, 89 , 91 S.W.3d 472, 506 (2002). … Frank settlement qualified as a court-order exception under Amendment 74; and (2) the present case was barred by the doctrine of res judicata.

Hughes, Guardian v. Edwards

198 Ark. 673 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 3, 1939

Appellant contends that under the first devising clause of the will Willie Sturdivant, was clearly granted the fee absolute in the eighty acre tract and that it was beyond the power of the testatrix by a later provision to … modify or qualify the first provision so as to limit the first grant to a life estate.

Humphrey v. Thompson

222 Ark. 884 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 11, 1954

1950 Census, to Establish a Construction Fund and for Other Purposes. . . . … For each such school coming within the provisions of Section 1 there is hereby appropriated out of the General Revenue Fund $200,000 for each such school so qualifying to be used as a construction fund for establishing such

Page v. McCuen

318 Ark. 342 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 20, 1994

BY A QUALIFIED, BONDED CASINO GAMING LICENSEE WHO CAN DEMONSTRATE OWNERSHIP OF THE DESIGNATED LAND." … We should follow our established rules. C.

State v. Ashley

347 Ark. 523 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 7, 2002

The State argues in its brief to this Court that “[t]he circuit court clearly misapplied the law in finding that the portion of the nightclub where the lap dances were being performed was not a ‘public place’. . .” … —Crim. 3(c), then we might as well remove the rule from our Rules of Appellate Criminal Procedure because no State appeal will qualify.

Ford v. State

334 Ark. 385 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 1, 1998

A trial court’s rulings on the admissibility of evidence are not overturned absent a showing that the trial court has clearly abused its discretion. Parker v. State, 333 Ark. 137 , 968 S.W.2d 592 (1998); Webb v. … Graham’s mother and his grandmother were qualified to express an opinion about his then-current mental condition; thus, we held that it was error to refuse their testimony. Mr.

Hotels.com, L.P. v. Pine Bluff Advertising & Promotion Comission

430 S.W.3d 56 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 10, 2013

P. 23 as the failure to do so rendered the Class Representatives unable to establish the class-action requirements. … To that end, when a plaintiff prays for relief that is clearly not available at the administrative level, exhaustion of other available administrative remedies is not required. See id.

Ricky Lewis Neal v. State of Arkansas

682 S.W.3d 672 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 15, 2024

Neal claimed once more that he was not qualified to represent himself but that he needed an attorney’s help with his case. … This man is trying to kill me[,]” was clearly admissible under Rule 803(3) of the Arkansas Rules of Evidence.

Coffelt v. Nicholson

224 Ark. 176 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 8, 1954

Coupled with the Dean’s conclusions was the statement that on a competitive basis the reasons formerly given for rejection would not be waived, but inasmuch as an “opening” existed and no one better qualified would be discommoded … But Dean Nicholson, still intrigued with Rosemary’s capabilities and hoping (but seemingly with reservations) that she could be made to realize the desirability of conformity and take a more reasonable attitude toward the established

Sanford v. State

331 Ark. 334 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 5, 1998

Moreover, the State established that Sanford had been adjudicated a delinquent on two prior occasions. … Donald’s responses did not prevent her from being death qualified, but did indicate her propensity towards rendering a life sentence instead of the death penalty.