Case law

Hopson v. United States

136 F. Supp. 804 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jan 5, 1956

Thus, plaintiff is entitled to recover if he has established negligence on the part of Renfrow or any other Government employee, and in this connection the burden of proof is upon plaintiff to establish his ease. … The Supreme Court has interpreted the Tort Claims Act “to require clear relinquishment of sovereign immunity t<J give jurisdiction for tort actions”. Dalehite v.

Branch v. Hempstead County Memorial Hospital

539 F. Supp. 908 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Apr 23, 1982

Of course, the law clearly is that the governing body of a hospital cannot wholly delegate to the staff its duty to see that only qualified physicians practice in a hospital, and it has an independent duty to review and examine … The governing body has a duty to establish procedures that will insure that only qualified doctors provide services to the patients of the hospital in a non-negligent manner, and cannot look the other way simply because some

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Southwestern Electric Power Co.

591 F. Supp. 1128 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jul 19, 1984

Plaintiff must establish a prima facie case of sex discrimination by meeting the test set forth in these cases; 2. … The burden then shifts to the defendant to clearly explain or articulate the legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for its action; 3.

United States v. Crawford

220 F. Supp. 3d 931 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Nov 10, 2016

And, if it cannot meet its burden of proving that the plain view exception applies, then the Government must “establish by a preponderance of the evidence,” Nix v. … This is so because the remaining relevant *938 portion of the affidavit—concerning the incident at the diner and ensuing Facebook messages—clearly does provide probable cause.

Communications Workers of America v. Arkansas Western Gas Co.

329 F. Supp. 896 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Aug 10, 1971

(b) He shall have no power to establish wage rates or scales or to change any existing wage scale or wage structure. … This contract clearly contemplates flexibility with respect to these matters.

Bordock

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Dec 12, 2025

“[I]t is well established that a municipality [or county] cannot be held liable on a respondeat superior theory, that is, solely because it employs a tortfeasor.” Atkinson v. … False Arrest An officer is entitled to “qualified immunity for a warrantless arrest if the arrest was supported by at least ‘arguable probable cause.’”

Radford v. Marten

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Sep 27, 2023

“Few doctrines were more solidly established at common law than the immunity of judges for liability for damages for acts committed within their judicial jurisdiction.” Pierson v. Ray, 386 U.S. 547, 553-54 (1967). … Clearly all of Plaintiff’s allegations revolve around Judge Talley’s decisions as the judge in Plaintiff’s criminal matter. Accordingly, Judge Talley is immune from all of Plaintiff’s allegations. See Woodworth v.

Brown v. Tyson Foods, Inc.

36 F. Supp. 3d 810 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jul 29, 2014

STANDARD OF REVIEW The standard of review for summary judgment is well established. … The September 2012 dancing incident and the October 2012 Fa-cebook posts clearly qualify as unacceptable workplace behavior.

Richmond v. Callahan

998 F. Supp. 1007 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Aug 20, 1997

The Commissioner has established, by regulation, a five-step sequential evaluation for determining whether an individual is disabled. … It is likely that she would malinger on formal testing as she appears to be trying to qualify for Disability benefits. (T. 145).

Horton v. Marshall Public Schools

589 F. Supp. 95 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jun 1, 1984

Although the Supreme Court held that such a durational requirement clearly violated the Equal Protection Clause by penalizing the fundamental right of interstate travel without promoting a compelling state interest, Justice … Malkerson, 401 U.S. 985 , 91 S.Ct. 1231 , 28 L.Ed.2d 527 (1971), the Court summarily affirmed a district court decision upholding a regulation of the University of Minnesota providing that no student could qualify as a resident

Garcia v. Harris

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Nov 8, 2019

Defendants also argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity and summary judgment as a matter of law. … Defendants further argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity and summary judgment as a matter of law.

Russ v. White

541 F. Supp. 888 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Sep 25, 1981

The evidence clearly reveals that the conflict between Dr. Russ and Dr. Fisher had an adverse effect on the whole staff. It interfered with and interrupted the daily business of the school. … The First Amendment does not immunize an administrator from termination when the speech is accompanied by abuse and threats. By his own admission and written document, Dr.

Stitz v. City of Eureka Springs

9 F. Supp. 2d 1046 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jun 12, 1998

Furthermore, the court presumes, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, that defendant has not established a civil service commission to govern the police department. … Thus, clearly, the EEOC had not made a “determination” as to whether a violation had occurred as is required under the GERA.

Fink

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 20, 2026

For ground two, she seeks immunity, stating, “I want to be granted immunity from prosecution to be able to give compelling info[rmation] against another individual and become a CI.” (Id., p. 7). … For her second ground for relief, she seeks immunity, stating, “I want to be granted immunity from prosecution to be able to give compelling info[rmation] against another individual and become a CI.”

Carter v. Arkansas Department of Human Services

186 F. Supp. 2d 993 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Feb 6, 2002

To establish a prima facie case of disability discrimination under the ADA, a plaintiff must show: (1) that she is a disabled person within the meaning of the ADA; (2) that she was qualified to perform the essential functions … Therefore, the evidence does not establish the existence of a disability as that word is defined in the Act.

Prinsen v. Domtar Paper Company, LLC

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jan 31, 2023

However, § 3 of Amendment 98 also precludes claims against employers for certain actions taken against qualifying patients: (B) A cause of action shall not be established against an employer based upon, and an employer … Plaintiffs then argue that their claim is clearly applicable under the plain text of Amendment 98. Id. at p. 16-24.

Scott v. King

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Apr 19, 2023

Personal capacity claims “are those which allege personal liability for individual actions by officials in the course of their duties; these claims do not require proof of any policy and qualified immunity may be raised … To prove a claim against Defendant King, Plaintiff must establish that Defendant King “personally violated [his] constitutional rights.” Jackson v. Nixon, 747 F.3d 537, 543 (8th Cir. 2014).

Gwin v. Sturgeon

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Nov 13, 2024

Personal capacity claims “are those which allege personal liability for individual actions by officials in the course of their duties; these claims do not require proof of any policy and qualified immunity may be raised … Plaintiff clearly grieved the issue of Defendants failing to take his complaint about his fellow inmate, his segregation, and his problem with Defendant Gwin, but there is nothing in this grievance regarding a denial of

Lackey v. Cradduck

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Oct 31, 2017

Clearly Defendants had no budgetary constraints as the program was offered free to the jail and there was no evidence introduced to suggest Defendants were faced with establishing priorities for scarce educational resources … Qualified Immunity Having found no genuine issues of material fact as to whether the Plaintiff's constitutional rights were violated, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity

Marymont v. Joyce

352 F. Supp. 547 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Dec 29, 1972

Federal subject matter jurisdiction is established. 28 U.S.C.A., § 2241 ; Relford v. Commandant, 1971, 401 U.S. 355 , 91 S.Ct. 649 , 28 L.Ed.2d 102 ; Levy v. … No contention is made that petitioner’s statement or any other item of information or evidence supplied by him was obtained by any force, threats, or promises of reward, immunity, or leniency. 4 .