Case law

Snider v. State

2009 Ark. App. 472 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jun 17, 2009

Accordingly, we hold that although the trial judge clearly erred in admitting Blackwell’s videotaped interview, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. … Accordingly, the prejudice clearly outweighed the probative value of the 911 tapes, and therefore, it was error for the trial court to admit the 911 tapes.

Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Co. v. Watkins

2011 Ark. App. 388 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · May 25, 2011

Watkins’s request for reimbursement of the Turner settlement and his defense costs and filed this action for a declaratory judgment establishing that it had no duty to defend or indemnify Mr. Watkins. … Farm Bureau asked the trial court to “declare” that no UIM coverage existed under Krouse’s automobile insurance policy for notice failures on her part; it sought to determine a right or immunity on its behalf.

Robert Bevell v. Arkansas Department of Human Services and Minor Child

662 S.W.3d 259 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Mar 8, 2023

The question in Bevell’s case is whether the oral finding that Bevell is MC’s biological father coupled with the written order finding Bevell to be MC’s “legal father” qualifies as a finding that he is, in fact, MC’s parent … We hold that the circuit court did not clearly err in finding that Bevell subjected MC to aggravated circumstances.

Katharena Flowers v. Arkansas Department of Human Services and Minor Children

666 S.W.3d 128 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Apr 19, 2023

person for whom a guardian is prayed is either a minor or otherwise incapacitated; (2) a guardianship is desirable to protect the interests of the incapacitated person; and (3) the person to be appointed guardian is qualified … The evidence presented established that in May 2021, appellant was charged with DUI and endangering the welfare of a minor; the children had remained out of her custody since that time for more than fifteen months; appellant

Campbell v. Arkansas Department of Human Services

2013 Ark. App. 84 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Feb 13, 2013

She testified that there were families available to adopt the children and that one family in particular had been identified and qualified as an adoptive placement. According to Spencer, adoption was very likely. … We will not reverse the circuit court’s ruling unless its findings are clearly erroneous. Id., 40 S.W.3d 286 .

Jones v. Douglas

470 S.W.3d 302 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Sep 16, 2015

. : I do not agree that the circuit court clearly erred in relying on sworn affidavits from appellees Douglas and Morrison that they did not refuse mailed service or authorize anyone else to refuse it for them. … The court of appeals agreed that service had not been established and reversed the circuit court’s order terminating his parental rights.

Leaf Home Solutions and Pma Management Group v. John Kunkel

702 S.W.3d 398 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Nov 6, 2024

Our court held that an order that establishes a party’s right to recover but remands for a determination of the amount of benefits to be awarded was not a final order and dismissed the appeal. Id. … Strict construction requires that nothing be taken as intended that is not clearly expressed. Lewis v. Calfrac Well Servs. Corp., 2015 Ark. App. 141, at 5, 457 S.W.3d 313, 316.

Calvin Kentra Marshall v. State of Arkansas

2021 Ark. App. 346 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Sep 22, 2021

In a revocation proceeding, the State need only establish one of the bases alleged in its petition to revoke, and the burden is by a preponderance of the evidence. Bledsoe v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 410. … Marshall’s counsel contends that Marshall did not qualify to be released pending transfer to the Arkansas Division of Correction because his underlying battery conviction was not a nonviolent offense. See Ark.

Victory v. Smith

2012 Ark. App. 168 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Feb 22, 2012

Bank of the Ozarks loan officer Gina King testified that the Victorys qualified for the loan to pay for the Treece property. … The Victorys argue, and we agree, that the trial court clearly ei’red. First, the trial court erred in fact.

Washington v. State

2010 Ark. App. 596 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Sep 15, 2010

Washington replied that the testimony would rebut the State’s inference that the $2084 was drug money and that the State had not qualified Chapmond as an expert. … Here, as in Phillips and Meadows, Washington’s motions for directed verdict did not clearly and specifically enunciate the proof that was missing regarding the criminal offense.

Devor v. State

2012 Ark. App. 82 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jan 25, 2012

In April 2009, Monica became a State witness in exchange for immunity. Dee was arrested for capital murder not long afterward and remained jailed for more than a year. … App. 613 , 343 S.W.3d 327 (test requires that accomplice testimony be excluded and that other evidence independently establishes the crime and corroboration evidence “tends to connect” the defendant with it).

Taylor v. Hamilton

90 Ark. App. 235 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Mar 9, 2005

On March 26, 2002, Jimmy filed a petition against Gladys to establish Samuel’s paternity in the Jefferson County Circuit Court. … Code Ann. § 28-9-209 (d)’s requirement that a court of competent jurisdiction establish his paternity.

Noble v. Neal

572 S.W.3d 40 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Feb 13, 2019

However, she argues that the claim of heirship was not concluded or established within the required 180 days. … We believe that the trial court clearly erred in finding that Reed was Langdon's heir.

MacKintrush v. State

60 Ark. App. 42 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Dec 22, 1997

Kokes, who had been qualified as a forensic pathologist rather than a reconstructionist; therefore, he argued, Dr. … The duty of the trial judge is explained as follows: These procedures have been well established in our case law and are consistent with the principles set forth in Batson through Purkett.

Larry Zane Neff v. State of Arkansas

618 S.W.3d 479 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Mar 17, 2021

A circuit court’s factual determinations on a motion for a new trial will not be reversed unless clearly erroneous, and the circuit court determines issues of credibility. Id. … Jurors are presumed to be unbiased and qualified to serve. E.g., Holloway v. State, 363 Ark. 254, 213 S.W.3d 633 (2005); see also Taffner, supra.

Arkansas Electric Energy Consumers, Inc. v. Arkansas Public Service Commission

2012 Ark. App. 264 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Apr 18, 2012

In doing so, we observe that the interpretation of a statute by the agency charged with its execution is highly persuasive, and, while not binding on this court, will not be overturned unless it is clearly wrong. Sw. … 1) removed the utility’s production facilities from the Commission’s jurisdiction; 2) violated the idea that a public utility’s production assets are held in trust for the public; 3) made shareholders’ use of the assets immune

Ashley Bancstock Co. v. Meredith

534 S.W.3d 762 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Nov 8, 2017

(3) If the applicant establishes that he or she is qualified and entitled to the inspection, the court shall grant an order permitting the inspection, subject … ABC argues that the shareholders had the burden of proof because the statute requires the applicant seeking to inspect records to establish that he or she is qualified and entitled to the inspection by demonstrating, among

Gabriel E. Walton v. State of Arkansas

602 S.W.3d 754 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · May 27, 2020

She also said that Gabriel would turn eighteen in a few months and could not qualify for a juvenile youth facility after that time. … We hold that the circuit court’s denial of Gabriel’s transfer motion was not clearly erroneous.

Baptist Health Medical Center v. First Community Bank of Batesville

537 S.W.3d 760 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Dec 6, 2017

In its motion to vacate the, court’s February 26, 2015 guardianship order, BHMC argued that (1) the original order was not supported by an oral or sworn written statement by a “qualified professional” as that term is defined … BHMC appeals from this order. |4We review probate proceedings de novo, but we will not reverse a finding of fact by the circuit court unless it is clearly erroneous. Donley v.

Tracor/MBA v. Baptist Medical Center

29 Ark. App. 198 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Nov 22, 1989

The test is well established. … Under all the circumstances, I think it was proper to reverse and remand this matter to the Commission to allow it to focus clearly on the factual issues it must decide.