Case law

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Jul 18, 2007

*Page 2 RESPONSE I must respectfully decline to address your question, which is the subject of pending litigation in the Jefferson County Circuit Court in an action styled Dollarway Patrons for Better Schools, et al. v. … Thomas Gathen, Superintendent, Dollarway School Board, et al.; CV 2007-614-2.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Jun 5, 2001

Marcum v. Wengert, 344 Ark. 153 , ___ S.W.3d ___ (2001) (the word "may" indicates that described action is discretionary, whereas the word "shall" indicates that described action is mandatory). … The pertinent part of A.C.A. § 24-10-302 states: (d)(1) In the event an employer has in effect for all or part of its employees a plan similar in purpose to this system, then by agreement with the board, after the board has

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · May 23, 2002

And there is a provision stating that "[v]iolations of any provision of ordinances and regulations adopted to carry out the intent of plans shall be considered a misdemeanor." A.C.A. § 14-56-421 (a). … Att'y Gen. 91-340 and Economy Wholesale Co., Inc. v. Rodgers, 232 Ark. 835 , 430 S.W.2d 583 (1960) (noting that a land-use plan is not a zoning ordinance).

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Jun 17, 2008

Bailey v. McCuen , 318 Ark. 277 , 285 , 884 S.W.2d 938 (1994), citing Finn v. McCuen , 303 Ark. 418 , 798 S.W.2d 34 (1990); Gaines v. McCuen , 296 Ark. 513 , 758 S.W.2d 403 (1988); Hoban v. Hall , supra ; and Walton v. … First, the repeal of Act 1813 will not alone stop the ABC Board from issuing private club licenses.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Feb 10, 1988

Byrd v. State, 240 Ark. 743 , 420 S.W.2d 121 (1966). … Some guidance is, however, offered in the case of Tappan v.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · May 27, 1993

The United States Supreme Court in Barrentine v. … The following language from the case of Alexander v.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Jun 18, 2001

For example, dicta in the case of Muse v. … School teachers are employed by school boards whose members are elected by the people of that school district.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Sep 20, 2004

Corp. v. Delta-Hills Health Sys. Agency, 285 Ark. 397 , 687 S.W.2d 840 (1985). Accord, Romine v. Dept. of Environmental Quality, 342 Ark. 380 , 40 S.W.3d 731 (2000); National Park Med. Ctr., Inc. v. … Nos. 2004-050 ; 97-312; 97-121; 97-109; 97-041; 96-328; 95-367, citing Conner v. Burnett, 216 Ark. 559 , 226 S.W.2d 984 (1950) and Weeks v. Texarkana, 50 Ark. 81 6 S.W. 504 (1887).

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Nov 10, 1993

McCuen: This is in response to your request for an opinion regarding school board runoff elections and the time within which they are to be held. … In Jeffers v. Clinton, 740 F.Supp. 585 (E.D.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Aug 26, 1992

You state that the Contractor's Licensing Board ("Board") is including the cost of the materials, even if they are furnished by the general contractor, in determining whether the subcontractor must be licensed. … Sincerely, WINSTON BRYANT Attorney General WB:cyh Enclosure 1 Arkansas Contractors Licensing Board v. Butler, 295 Ark. 223 , 748 S.W.2d 129 (1988).

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Sep 10, 2002

Republican Party, 318 Ark. 50 , 883 S.W.2d 805 (1994) and State v. Craighead County Board of Election Commissioners, 300 Ark. 405 , 779 S.W.2d 169 (1989). … McFarlin v. Kelly, 246 Ark. 1237 , 442 S.W.2d 183 (1969) and Orr v.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · May 2, 1989

Looper v. Gordon, 201 Ark. 841 , 847 , 147 S.W.2d 24 (1941). The answer to your second question involving the difference in disability benefits for on-the-job illness or injury is "yes." … The additional benefits provided herein shall be effective for all qualifying applications first received by the board on or after January 1, 1987.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Aug 21, 1987

Municipal Corporations 2119; Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. v. Casady, 106 F.2d 784 (C.C.A. Okl.). As a general matter, therefore, the answer to the first question is no. … Johnson v. Dermott, 189 Ark. 830 , 75 S.W.2d 243 (1934). This leads to the conclusion that the city may use surplus garbage removal revenue for other municipal purposes.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Dec 2, 1992

See Hawkins v. Stover, 274 Ark. 125 , 622 S.W.2d 668 (1981). See also Op. Att'y Gen. 89-193 , a copy of which is enclosed. … See Hawkins v. Stover, 274 Ark. 125 , 622 S.W.2d 667 (1981).

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Apr 29, 2002

Arkansas Dep't of Human Servs. v. Walters, 315 Ark. 204 , 866 S.W.2d 823 (1993). … Board.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Feb 29, 2000

In City of Paris v. … In Pogue v.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Feb 13, 2006

The latter type of communication was at issue in Harris v. City of Fort Smith, No. 04-485 (Ark.Sup.Ct. … Board meeting subject to the FOIA.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Aug 23, 1995

See Cox v. Commissioners of Maynard Fire Imp. Dist. No. 1, 287 Ark. 173 , 697 S.W.2d 104 (1985). … Furthermore, the boards may establish a different fee for commercial property than for residential property. A.C.A. § 14-284-212 (g).

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Oct 4, 1994

If not, does the Sebastian County Board of Election Commissioners have the authority to remove this independent candidate's name from the ballot, which seems to be inappropriate in view of State v. … It thus appears that the board of election commissioners must determine the prima facie sufficiency of the petition. See generally Carroll v. Schneider, 211 Ark. 538 , 201 S.W.2d 221 (1947) and Swiderski v.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · May 10, 1990

Co. v. Pireno, 458 U.S. 119 , 132 (1982). "Whether the claim will be paid or not is dependent on the terms and conditions of the insurance contract and its enforcement." Alleghany Corp. v. Pomeroy, 700 F. … Additionally, the scope of chiropractic is defined by statute and there would be no authority for the Arkansas State Board of Chiropractors to expand that definition by resolution. See, generally, People v.