Case law

Folta v. Norfork Brewing Company

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Sep 1, 2022

Aamodt about business matters via text message and telephone—these tasks are not enough to establish Mr. … Clearly, the parties agree that Mr. Folta sent and received at least some work- related text messages. They disagree about whether Mr.

In re Jackson

9 F. Supp. 717 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jan 30, 1935

Haney thereafter, on the 20th day of June, 1931, was duly appointed trustee of the bankrupt’s estate and effects, and qualified for the same on the 23d day of July, 1931. … Section 60a, as amended, clearly made-the conveyances under consideration, preferences.

Owens v. Samuel

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Apr 3, 2024

must dismiss a complaint, or any portion of it, if it contains claims that: (1) are frivolous, malicious, or fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or (2) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Arkansas clearly has an important interest in enforcing its criminal laws. There are important interests in allowing state courts to administer their own cases.

Zimpel v. Trawick

679 F. Supp. 1502 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jan 28, 1988

The matter misrepresented or not disclosed was clearly material. In fact, as pointed out above, Trawick admitted that it was when he agreed that Ms. … That was clearly an arms-length transaction.

Sierra Club v. Robertson

784 F. Supp. 593 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Nov 27, 1991

This conclusion seems to the court to be clearly wrong. … Diversity Finally, the court must consider the only argument that the plaintiffs have advanced that is clearly before the court. See Section II, supra.

Rice v. Rice

125 F. Supp. 900 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Nov 19, 1954

Rice in order that he might continue to enjoy the fruits thereof, immune from the plaintiff’s judgments.” … The evidence is insufficient to establish that R. A.

Shell v. Lingo

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Sep 26, 2025

Defendant Lingo and Donna next argue that they are “entitled to qualified immunity on [Plaintiff’s] second claim concerning the use of a restraint chair because they followed a medical professional’s instructions 1 Plaintiff … establish that Defendant Elkin’s advice deliberately disregarded his medical needs.

Shell v. Elkin

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Sep 25, 2025

Defendant Lingo and Donna next argue that they are “entitled to qualified immunity on [Plaintiff’s] second claim concerning the use of a restraint chair because they followed a medical professional’s instructions following … establish that Defendant Elkin’s advice deliberately disregarded his medical needs.

Gay

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 27, 2026

established federal law or that it applied clearly established law to the facts of his case in an ‘objectively unreasonable manner.’” … Certainly, the Court cannot say that the Arkansas Supreme Court’s decision was an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law.

Hurst v. Rucker

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 24, 2022

Defendants say that even if they could be considered to be acting under color of law, they are entitled to qualified immunity. … For these reasons, Defendants did not act under “color of law” for purposes of establishing liability under § 1983. C.

Hobbs, II v. Cpl. Byrd

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 30, 2023

must dismiss a complaint, or any portion of it, if it contains claims that: (1) are frivolous or malicious; (2) fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or, (3) seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune … Officer Byrd was clearly acting under color of state law. Thus, the question is whether Officer Byrd’s actions violated the Plaintiff’s constitutional rights. A.

Rankins v. Haney

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Sep 29, 2022

immunity; and 5) there is no basis for official capacity liability. … immunity.

Sasser v. Hobbs

751 F. Supp. 2d 1063 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Nov 3, 2010

Smith was proposed as a qualified expert in the history of special education in the state of Arkansas. Dr. … Second, the proposed witness must be qualified. Id.

Arkansas Right to Life State Political Action Committee v. Butler

983 F. Supp. 1209 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Nov 18, 1997

Plaintiffs have not established any special relationship that warrants allowing them to assert the rights of candidates. … Thus, the disclaimer required by Arkansas Code § 7-6-221 clearly implicates ARL’s First Amendment right to free speech.

Norwood v. Slammons

788 F. Supp. 1020 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · May 8, 1991

Secondly, this is merely an attempt to explain why FERPA does not qualify as a valid defense to an FOI request. … Under the well-pleaded complaint rule, discussed supra at pp. 1024-1025, this does not establish the claim as one arising under federal law.

Dismuke v. Martin

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Aug 16, 2023

Plaintiff claims that inmates perform plumbing and electrical work at the CCDC even though they are not qualified. Id. at p. 12. … Instead, to establish a claim against Sheriff Martin in his individual capacity as a supervisor, Plaintiff must establish that “(1) he had notice of a pattern of unconstitutional acts committed by his subordinates; (2)

Swearingen ex rel. B v. Ozark Mountain School District

225 F. Supp. 3d 813 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Dec 7, 2016

Cantrell explained that the reason why she did not refer B for services was “[b]ecause he did not qualify at the beginning of the year.” Id. at p. 110 . … Clearly, the Swearingens prevailed here.

Boulden v. Herring

126 F. Supp. 885 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Dec 17, 1954

Not only has he presided over the trial but he is qualified by training and by experience to assess reasonable compensation for legal services. … If the attorney’s fee is dependent upon whether or not a trial is required, an attorney would not be inclined to terminate the litigation without an actual trial unless it clearly appeared that his client’s interest demanded

Brown v. Crossett Police Department

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · May 13, 2020

The United States Supreme Court has established several limited abstention doctrines to preserve such principles. Beavers v. Ark. State Bd. of Dental Exam’rs, 151 F.3d 838, 840-41 (8th Cir. 1998). … The Court finds that the Younger abstention doctrine applies to this case because Plaintiff’s claims involve an ongoing state criminal proceeding against him, the state clearly has an important interest in enforcing its

Brewer v. Jeep Corp.

546 F. Supp. 1147 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Aug 31, 1982

As indicated above, the elected representatives of the people had clearly legislated that when that occurs, the party seeking damages recovers nothing. … As such, a jury must be totally immune from any possible coercion or subtle pressures to increase or decrease its decided verdict by reason of the court’s interrogation and direction to reconsider its findings. ****** To