Case law

Cross County School District v. Spencer ex rel. Moran

75 Ark. App. 421 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Nov 7, 2001

Schs. v. Lockhart, 72 Ark. App. 24 , 32 S.W.3d 47 (2000). … Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565, 577-78 (1975) (citing Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968)). The courts have been reluctant to interfere with the authority of local school boards to handle local problems. Fortman v.

Hart v. Bridges

30 Ark. App. 262 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Mar 21, 1990

This code section also makes it clear that the principal is under the supervision of the school board. In Morton v. Hampton School Dist. No. 1, 16 Ark. … In Clements v.

Castrellon v. State

2013 Ark. App. 408 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jun 19, 2013

v. … Brown v. State, 374 Ark. 341 , 288 S.W.3d 226 (2008). The victim’s testimony 15need not be corroborated, and the victim’s testimony alone, describing the sexual contact, is enough for a conviction. Colburn v.

KTAL Inc. v. Dir

2015 Ark. App. 314 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · May 13, 2015

Oxford v. Daniels, 2 Ark. App. 200, 618 S.W.2d 171 (1981). Here, substantial evidence does not support the Board’s conclusion that any such effort on Davis’s part would have been futile. … See Woodunique, Inc. v. Director, Department of Workforce Services, 103 Ark.

King v. Elkins Public Schools

22 Ark. App. 52 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jul 22, 1987

Leola School District v. McMahan, 289 Ark. 496 , 712 S.W.2d 903 (1986). … A school board’s action in this regard is arbitrary, capricious, or discriminatory only if the board’s decision is not supportable on any rational basis. Kirtley v.

Gilton v. State

562 S.W.3d 257 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Oct 17, 2018

Castrellon v. State , 2013 Ark. App. 408 , at 2, 428 S.W.3d 607 , 609-10. … See Brown v. State , 374 Ark. 341 , 288 S.W.3d 226 (2008).

Bergman v. Director, Department of Workforce Services

2010 Ark. App. 729 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Nov 3, 2010

That finding was upheld by the Board of Review, and Bergman timely appealed to this court. On appeal, we review the findings of the Board of Review and affirm if they are supported by substantial evidence. Walls v. … We review the evidence and all reasonable inferences deducible therefrom in a light most favorable to the Board’s findings. Lovelace v. Director, 78 Ark.App. 127 , 79 S.W.3d 400 (2002). Citing Smith v.

Andris McClendon v. State of Arkansas

599 S.W.3d 668 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Apr 8, 2020

McClure v. State, 328 Ark. 35, 942 S.W.2d 243 (1997). We will not reverse a circuit court’s decision whether to transfer a case unless it is clearly erroneous. Nichols v. State, 2015 Ark. App. 397, 466 S.W.3d 431. … See Clem v. State, 351 Ark. 112, 90 S.W.3d 428 (2002).

Ihop 1914 v. Director, Department of Workforce Services

2023 Ark. App. 102 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Feb 22, 2023

Bank of Fayetteville NA v. Dir., 2016 Ark. App. 96. … Steel v. Dir., 2016 Ark. App. 377. Because Delt was practicing law when she signed the petition, the petition is null and void. Id. As a result, we lack jurisdiction and dismiss this appeal. See Super 8 Motel v.

McBride v. Daniels

269 Ark. 705 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jun 4, 1980

We are persuaded that our recent decision in Albina Paulino v. Charles L. Daniels, Director of Labor, 269 Ark. 676 , 599 S.W. 2d 760 (Ark. App. 1980) is dispositive of the issue before us. … That is the duty and responsibility of the Board of Review as the fact-finding body. ...

Carraro v. Director, Employment Security Division

54 Ark. App. 210 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jun 26, 1996

When the Board’s decision is not supported by substantial evidence, we will reverse. Sadler v. Stiles, 22 Ark. App. 117 , 735 S.W.2d 708 (1987). … Victor Industries Corp. v. Daniels, 1 Ark. App. 6 , 611 S.W.2d 794 (1981). After reviewing the evidence, we cannot conclude the Board’s finding of misconduct is supported by substantial evidence.

Southwestern Bell Telephone, L.P. v. Director of Arkansas Employment Security Department

93 Ark. App. 303 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Nov 30, 2005

On appeal, the findings of the Board of Review are affirmed if they are supported by substantial evidence. Billings v. Director, 84 Ark. App. 79 , 133 S.W.3d 399 (2003). … Bradford v. Director, 83 Ark. App. 332 , 128 S.W.3d 20 (2003) (citing Osterhout v. Everett, 6 Ark. App. 216 , 639 S.W.2d 539 (1982)).

Hatchett v. Terry

87 Ark. App. 276 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Sep 8, 2004

See Scherz v. Mundaca Inv. … First State Bank v. Cook, supra; Clark v. Lesser, supra.

Osterhout v. Everett

6 Ark. App. 216 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Oct 6, 1982

Additionally, we note that New Jersey has also decided this question in Nicholas v. Board of Review, 171 N.J. Super. 36 , 407 A.2d 1254 (1979). … Co. v.

Clausen v. State

50 Ark. App. 149 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jul 5, 1995

Brown areas are older in nature. Bluer marks are from a more recent injury. Normally, a bruise dissipates within 21 days. … In Idaho v.

Abbott v. Dir.

2015 Ark. App. 221 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Apr 8, 2015

V. … –Civ. 6(e); see also Heard v. Regions Bank, 369 Ark. 274, 276–77, 253 S.W.3d 422, 424 (2007) (per curiam).

Miller v. State

567 S.W.3d 68 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Dec 12, 2018

Holsombach v. State , 368 Ark. 415 , 246 S.W.3d 871 (2007). … McDonald v. State , 356 Ark. 106 , 146 S.W.3d 883 (2004) ; see also Daniel v. State , 64 Ark.

Erin Shanahan v. Director, Department of Workforce Services

655 S.W.3d 745 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Nov 30, 2022

V. … Issues of credibility of witnesses and the weight to be afforded their testimony are matters for the Board to determine. Bradford v. Dir., 83 Ark. App. 332, 338, 128 S.W.3d 20, 23 (2003).

Travelers Insurance Co. v. Cole

3 Ark. App. 183 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Nov 18, 1981

Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Co. v. Williams, 260 Ark. 659 , 543 S.W. 2d 467 (1976). In Brown v. … In Brown, after an initial determination of ineligibility, it was determined that Brown was eligible for disability benefits, and therefore entitled to benefits accrued but not yet paid.

Sims v. Director, Department of Workforce Services

443 S.W.3d 570 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Oct 1, 2014

We review the Board’s findings in the light most favorable to the prevailing party and affirm the Board’s decision if it is supported by substantial evidence. Price v. Dir., Dep’t of Workforce Servs., 2013 Ark. … Nibco, Inc. v. Metcalf, 1 Ark. App. 114, 613 S.W.2d 612 (1981).