Case law

735 IN US CURRENCY v. State

90 Ark. App. 358 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Mar 23, 2005

In discussing whether the trial court’s ruling was clearly erroneous, our supreme court stated, We cannot say the trial court clearly erred in this finding. … The State cannot be liable for attorney’s fees under the Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity, unless immunity is waived. See Lake View Sch. Dist. No. 25 v. Huckabee, 359 Ark. 49 , 194 S.W.3d 193 (2004).

Karen Hardesty, in Her Official Capacity as Boone County Assessor v. North Arkansas Medical Services, Inc., and North Arkansas Regional Medical Center, Inc.

2019 Ark. App. 410 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Sep 25, 2019

In civil bench trials, the standard of review on appeal is whether the circuit court’s findings were clearly erroneous or clearly against a preponderance of the evidence. Tadlock v. Moncus, 2013 Ark. … 2 the findings of fact by the circuit court only if clearly erroneous.

RAY & ELIZABETH EVANS v. O.A.K. CONSTRUCTION, INC.

Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Oct 8, 2025

[The Evanses] clearly had actual notice of this language as indicated by their signatures directly below the “Important Notice.” … Kenmark relied on Parker, supra, to establish appellate jurisdiction.

Wilson v. Wilson

431 S.W.3d 369 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Dec 18, 2013

App. 759 to make a determination as to whether a parent is “qualified” and “suitable” under section 28- 65-204(a). Fletcher v. Scorza, 2010 Ark. 64, 359 S.W.3d 413. … She said that she became aware that the grandparents were trying to establish a guardianship over her daughter when she returned to Camden.

Smith v. Lovelace

2011 Ark. App. 74 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Feb 2, 2011

Best-Interest Analysis Appellant contends that the trial court’s finding, that it was in the child’s best interest to have appellees as guardians, was clearly erroneous. … Appellant testified that he thought Rice, Sr., was the father of the minor child, Rice, Sr., testified that he was the father, and visitation had been established for Rice, Sr., as the father.

Duncan v. Duncan

2010 Ark. App. 561 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Sep 1, 2010

A finding is clearly erroneous when the reviewing court, based on the entire evidence, is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made. Id. … The “based upon the balances as of the date of execution” language in the settlement agreement does not establish that the parties agreed that appellee was to receive a fixed sum.

Howell v. Arkansas Department of Human Services

517 S.W.3d 431 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Mar 8, 2017

Based on a review of all the evidence, we do not conclude that the circuit court’s finding that Ricky failed to remedy the causes of the children’s removal was clearly erroneous. … Therefore, those cases are more accurately understood as continuations of the well-established rule that we will not entertain an argument raised for the first time on appeal, which is in keeping with the supreme court’s

Sherland v. Sherland

465 S.W.3d 3 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · May 27, 2015

App. 342 a finding of fact by the circuit court unless it is clearly erroneous. Witham v. Beck, 2013 Ark. App. 351, 428 S.W.3d 537. … Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000), a grandparent-visitation case, established a presumption that a fit parent acts in the best interest of her child.

Bain v. State

56 Ark. App. 7 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jan 29, 1997

expert or experts to be appointed by the court. (3) (A) A written report of the test results prepared by the duly qualified expert conducting the test, or by a duly qualified expert under whose supervision or direction the … Based on the evidence in the record, we cannot say that the trial court’s finding of paternity was clearly against the preponderance of the evidence.

Killian v. Hill

32 Ark. App. 25 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Sep 19, 1990

He testified that their ability as to accuracy was “very good” and that “they are just as qualified as the vast majority of people working on field crews in the State of Arkansas.” … Those code sections provide for the registration of “land surveyors-in-training” and establish penalties for violations of the Act. Appellant correctly notes that licensing statutes must be strictly construed.

Daniel Bahner v. Susan Wakefield and Kelli Larue

2026 Ark. App. 146 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Mar 4, 2026

A finding is clearly erroneous when, although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made. Id. … Contrary to Bahner’s argument, however, Simmons does not require reversal because it also involved a termination of guardianship rather than the establishment of one.

Davis v. Office of Child Support Enforcement

68 Ark. App. 88 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Nov 17, 1999

It is essentially a safety net program, to protect indigent persons who are otherwise qualified for the program. … If the custodial parent is impoverished then he would qualify for that additional assistance.

Fennell v. City of Pine Bluff

492 S.W.3d 887 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · May 18, 2016

App. 275 claims on the grounds that there was no protected speech, adverse action, retaliatory intent or the same-decision defense, and/or qualified immunity; (5) the circuit court erred in dismissing appellants’ overtime … claims based on the statute of limitations when they clearly alleged a denial of overtime as recently as 2012, suit was filed in 2011, the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act (AMWA) has a three-year statute of limitations, and appellees

Jones v. John B. Dozier Land Trust

511 S.W.3d 869 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jan 18, 2017

Our standard of review following a bench trial is whether the trial court’s findings are clearly erroneous or clearly against the preponderance of the evidence. Bohannon v. Robinson, 2014 Ark. 458, 447 S.W.3d 585. … Appellee offered an affidavit from The Southern Company in an attempt to qualify the estimate as a business- record exception to the hearsay rule.

Toby Doyle v. City of Bauxite, Arkansas; Bill Shryock; And Mayor Eddie Jones, Individually and in His Official Capacity as the Mayor of Bauxite, Arkansas

2025 Ark. App. 79 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Feb 12, 2025

Appellees asserted that Mayor Jones, in his individual capacity, was entitled to summary judgment based on qualified immunity. … The rule is well established that a litigant must exhaust his or her administrative remedies before instituting litigation to challenge the action of the administrative agency. Baker v. Dir., 2017 Ark.

Swadley v. Krugler

67 Ark. App. 297 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Sep 22, 1999

Her points on appeal are: 1) the trial court erred in not qualifying Dina C. … Joslin of DHS did not establish a time frame as to when her investigations of sexual abuse against appellee had taken place.

Smith v. Chicot-Lipe Insurance Agency

11 Ark. App. 49 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Mar 14, 1984

His argument is premised on the fact that the testimony qualifying the cards as business records was inadmissible because the witness was not qualified to verify appellant’s account. We disagree. … In his second argument, appellant contends the ap-pellee failed to establish that the appellant’s account was unpaid.

Matlock v. Arkansas Department of Human Services

458 S.W.3d 253 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Mar 11, 2015

However, she again explained that she wanted D.W. to be able to stay in his current placement “until we get established for him to be with his aunt. I want him with his family. … She explained that it was DHS’s policy to consider qualified family members as adoptive parents along with other qualified families.

In the Matter of Linda Rushton Selman, an Incapacitated Person, Frank D. Selman v. Robert Rushton Hurley

2022 Ark. App. 469 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Nov 16, 2022

On August 17, the circuit court continued the appointment of Rushton as the temporary guardian of Linda’s person for ninety days from entry of that order; gave Rushton the authority to employ caregivers for Linda; and established … This standard of review accords greater deference to the circuit court than the clearly erroneous standard.

Courtney Holmes v. Arkansas Department of Human Services

505 S.W.3d 730 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Oct 26, 2016

App. 495 standard of review is whether findings of fact were clearly erroneous); Merriman v. … Yutterman, 291 Ark. 207, 723 S.W.2d 823 (1987) (right to reform deed must be established beyond a reasonable doubt, and standard of review is whether trial court’s decision was clearly erroneous); Robinson v.