Case law

Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. v. Downs

11 Ark. App. 231 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · May 16, 1984

Of course, the principle is well established that a landowner may testify to the value of his lands, despite his lack of knowledge of property value, if a satisfactory explanation is given for his conclusion. … Reviewing all of Downs’ testimony, we believe that he clearly demontrated the necessary familiarity with his property upon which he based an opinion concerning its value.

State v. Hatchie Coon Hunting & Fishing Club, Inc.

98 Ark. App. 206 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Mar 21, 2007

App. 276 , 126 S.W.3d 738 (2003). 4 A trial judge’s findings of fact will be affirmed on appeal unless they are clearly erroneous or clearly against the preponderance of the evidence, and this court shall give due regard … While expert witness testimony is not required to prove accretion, a witness’s long familiarity with the river may qualify him to opine regarding how the property formed. See Mallory v.

Neal v. Farris

101 Ark. App. 375 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Feb 27, 2008

The circuit court stated that upon review of the pleadings filed and evidence presented, plaintiff had failed to meet the burden regarding a qualified medical expert. … Once the moving party has established a prima facie entitlement to summary judgment, the opposing party must meet proof with proof and demonstrate the existence of a material issue of fact. See Pakay v.

Purdie v. State

2010 Ark. App. 658 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Oct 6, 2010

To qualify as an abuse of discretion, the trial court 'must have acted improvidently, thoughtlessly, or without due consideration. Id. … As we have done here, this court disagreed, ruling that the uncorroborated testimony of the victim established the elements of the crime. Id.

Freddie Bradshaw v. Irene Bradshaw

682 S.W.3d 712 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jan 10, 2024

The parties agreed that the Court would appoint a qualified person to perform a market analysis of the properties. … Testimony established that Ms. Zack’s compensation began less than two weeks after Irene received her final check from the corporation. Ms.

Statco Wireless, LLC v. Southwestern Bell Wireless, LLC

80 Ark. App. 284 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jan 15, 2003

We do not think the trial court’s finding on this point was clearly erroneous. … Statco was intimately involved in the process of establishing personal relationships and soliciting customers.

Shields v. Kimble

2010 Ark. App. 479 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jun 2, 2010

She told him if he would come all the way up there to pick her up for New Year’s, she would drive down to pick her up in Arkansas at the end of the week; and testimony at trial, while controverted, established that appellee … We cannot say that the court’s findings were clearly erroneous on the [ isbasis of its application of the Hollandsworth factors.

Caroline Lasiter v. Newland & Associates, Pllc

2025 Ark. App. 348 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jun 4, 2025

Dail’s affidavit stood unrebutted and addressed each of the entities in question and established that each was owned by the trust at the relevant time. … Unlike the decedent in Thompson, Michael’s intent, as it is clearly expressed in the trust, was not to deprive Caroline of her right to receive his testamentary estate.

Steele v. State

434 S.W.3d 424 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Apr 30, 2014

It is well established that the question of whether sentences should run consecutively or concurrently lies solely within the province of the trial court. Throneberry v. State, 2009 Ark. 507 , 342 S.W.3d 269 . … The exercise of that discretion will not be altered on appeal unless it is clearly shown to have been abused. Id.

Montie Hobson v. George W. Hobson

2025 Ark. App. 311 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · May 14, 2025

No fees are awarded to [Montie] for success in establishing a breach of contract. … Montie contends that the circuit court’s finding in this respect was clearly erroneous.

Dominguez v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.

592 S.W.3d 723 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jan 15, 2020

Hamby asserted DHS’s position that termination was the best option to establish permanency and stability in CD’s life. … She said that DHS conducted a home study, but she did not make enough money to qualify as a provisional placement for CD.

Waldrip v. Graco Corp.

101 Ark. App. 101 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jan 9, 2008

When the General Assembly enacted the present statute as part of Act 796 of 1993, it clearly shifted the focus from proof that a workplace injury or death "was substantially occasioned by intoxication of the injured employee … Perhaps even more to the point at hand, why does testimony about the presence of something that is neither illegal nor a drug qualify to trigger the statutory presumption, yet testimony from co-workers about the injured worker's

Cincinnati Life Insurance v. Mickles

85 Ark. App. 188 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Feb 25, 2004

Four factors are necessary to establish the tort of outrage. … We require clear-cut proof to establish the elements in outrage cases. Id. Merely describing the conduct as outrageous does not make it so. Id.

Amason v. City of Calion

573 S.W.3d 30 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Feb 20, 2019

The 1934 surface lease shows that certain Union County landowners leased their interests in several parcels of land for the establishment of Calion Lake. … He asserts that their statements are inadmissible because Evans and Harrell do not qualify as experts, and their statements are not based on personal knowledge.

Tiner v. Tiner

2012 Ark. App. 483 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Sep 12, 2012

It is well established that, when parties enter voluntarily into an independent property settlement agreement that is incorporated into a decree of divorce, it cannot subsequently be modified by the court. Gentry v. … In Lake View, a school-funding case, our supreme court recognized that the Chrisco factors applied, after determining that attorney’s fees were appropriate where the State had waived sovereign immunity.

Michael Landon Doll v. State of Arkansas

598 S.W.3d 47 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Mar 4, 2020

Doll maintains that Detective Williams, by contrast, clearly lacked the expertise necessary to give such testimony. … Because the State introduced evidence of another act through the line of questioning at issue, Doll argues Rule 404(b) clearly applied.

Sorrells v. Bailey Cattle Co.

268 Ark. 800 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Apr 2, 1980

Clearly neither agreement separately meets the requirement of the statute of frauds. … An examination of the undated “preliminary” plat clearly fails to show any survey of the thirty acres.

Leighann Gonzales v. Arkansas Department of Human Services and Minor Child

2025 Ark. App. 496 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Oct 22, 2025

The ad litem added as follows: I don’t believe that anyone could ask her questions that she could answer that would qualify her as a competent witness. … Before taking testimony, the court allowed Gonzales’s attorney to attempt to establish MC’s competency.

Johnson v. State

2010 Ark. App. 153 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Feb 17, 2010

Appellant submits that there simply was no testimony that clearly establishes that the items in the seat had not been moved subsequent to the altercation between appellant and the victim. … We hold that he was qualified to testify about appellant’s demeanor under Rule 701 and the circuit court acted within its discretion to allow it.

Langston v. Brown

506 S.W.3d 261 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Nov 2, 2016

covered in the pleadings, 3 Appellant is a district judge. 4 Appellant also argued, however, that appellee had submitted no proof of income with which a determination of whether appellee qualified … in proper circumstances impute an income to a spouse according to what could be earned by the use of his or her best efforts to gain employment suitable to his or her capabilities; 30 and that a person’s decision to establish