Case law

Fochtman v. DARP, Inc.

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Nov 12, 2019

Clearly, this is an incorrect assessment of the burden of proof on summary judgment. In point of fact, Plaintiffs have already established that they are entitled to both compensatory and liquidated damages. … As to the second issue, the Court believes these “tacked on” amounts qualify under Ark.

Dooley v. West

210 F. Supp. 239 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Nov 7, 1962

Murray, would be qualified to pass on that. They went to see Murray a day or two before November 16, 1961. … Dooley if they should exercise their option as provided by the-agreement, nevertheless the option terms-clearly contemplate repayment to Mrs.

Norris

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jun 1, 2026

LEGAL STANDARD A party seeking a judgment on the pleadings under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c) will be granted relief when “the moving party has clearly established that no material … The Act is clearly content neutral. Act 728 also serves a significant government interest.

Ward v. Rice

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 12, 2018

Official Capacity Claims Section 1983 provides a federal cause of action for the deprivation, under color of state law, of a citizen's "rights, privileges, or immunities … “Inmates clearly retain protections afforded by the First Amendment, including its directive that no law shall prohibit the free exercise of religion.” O’Lone v.

Oliver v. Johanson

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Nov 21, 2018

It is these specific values and the overall algorithms that qualify as trade secrets under the ATSA. 10. … His behavior throughout his time with DB Squared clearly would have given DB Squared every right to believe that he intended them to continue using the newly finished DB Compensation 10 software.

Jones v. McKee Foods Corporation

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 1, 2019

LEGAL STANDARD The standard for summary judgment is well established. … Jones’ deposition testimony clearly establishes that McKee granted him FMLA leave every time he asked for it—including on the day of January 3rd.

Fochtman v. DARP, Inc.

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jun 27, 2018

Next, Hendren argues that the Complaint should be dismissed because the States of Arkansas and Oklahoma are indispensable parties under Rule 19, and sovereign immunity prevents their joinder. … Arkansas Administrative Code 010.14.1-112 provides that the Arkansas Department of Labor may rely upon federal precedent established by the FLSA in interpreting the AMWA, and courts regularly use federal FLSA

Shipp v. Central States Manufacturing, Inc.

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jul 5, 2024

All Company stock is wholly owned by an Employee Stock Ownership Plan, or “ESOP,” which was established in 1991. The ESOP’s primary purpose is to provide retirement benefits to Central States’s employees. … The parties agree that the ESOP, which currently has more than 700 total participants or beneficiaries, qualifies as a pension plan subject to the requirements of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. RLI Insurance

163 F. Supp. 2d 1025 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 23, 2001

Plaintiffs argue RLI certainly cannot establish that Cheyenne was free of fault thus entitling RLI to complete indemnity. … Walmart qualified as an additional insured under the RLI policy for any La-bility arising out of Cheyenne’s conduct.

Watkins v. Social Security Administration Commissioner

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Aug 29, 2019

which benefits 2 He worked for a time after his release from prison, from approximately December of 2014 through August of 2015, for a company called Airport Lube; but the money he made at this job was insufficient to qualify … This objection clearly does not address any finding or recommendation made by the magistrate judge. Second, the objection was waived. Mr.

Williams v. Harmony Grove School District

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Feb 27, 2025

Plaintiff admitted that she was angry and did not clearly remember everything that she said during the confrontation. (ECF No. 19-1, at 11). … She must demonstrate that: “(1) [she] is a member of a protected class; (2) [she] was qualified to perform her job; (3) [she] suffered an adverse employment action; and (4) [she] was treated differently from

EMCASCO Insurance Company v. NWA Grounds Services, LLC

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · May 12, 2023

Given these undisputed facts, there is no genuine, material dispute that the encroachment qualified as an “occurrence” for which NWAGS was required to provide notice “as soon as practicable.” Mr. … Even if, for the sake of argument, the Court were persuaded that before-suit notice was a question of fact, after-suit notice was clearly not provided in compliance with the policies. Mr.

Weston

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jan 19, 2026

It did not identify in what weeks offsite support would be needed, in what numbers, or in which parts of the process qualified onsite trainers were lacking. Id. Everyone agrees that the meeting did not go well. … Tyson’s performance justification clearly has a basis in fact. At the time of her termination, Ms.

Murphy v. Gospel for ASIA, Inc

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Sep 10, 2018

“The requirement that a class be clearly defined is designed primarily to help the trial court manage the class. … Clearly, the class is ascertainable by objective criteria.

The Satanic Temple, Inc. v. Lamar Media Corporation

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Dec 6, 2022

Nor does it clearly create a cause of action. … Target Stores, Inc., for example, the Arkansas Supreme Court held Arkansas law was superior to Louisiana law because the latter would have rendered the defendant immune from tort liability. 360 Ark. at 411–12.

Northport Health Services of Arkansas LLC v. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Apr 30, 2020

establishes that it is likely to prevail in this case.” 217 F. … “The threat of unrecoverable economic loss, however, does qualify as irreparable harm.” /d. In weighing the harms here, the Court finds that a stay pending appeal is not warranted.

Hause v. City of Fayetteville, Arkansas

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Dec 19, 2024

It is well established that exhaustion of state remedies is not a prerequisite to suit under § 1983. Carter v. … Here, too, the ordinary meanings of “frequency”6 and “concentration”7 are sufficiently specific to clearly proscribe Plaintiffs’ desired permit.

RJO Investments, Inc v. Crown Financial, LLC

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · May 2, 2018

Both factors must be established. Johnson, 227 F.3d at 241. 1 See Johnson v. Heublein Inc., 227 F.3d 236 (5th Cir. 2000); Wilson v. … Thus, due to Plaintiffs’ conduct, Crown Financial believes that it qualifies for the bad-faith exception to the timing rules of 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(3).

Hammond v. Vandermast

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Aug 14, 2020

Hammond’s son had a qualifying medical condition, whether Mr. Hammond's absence was necessary to care for his son, and whether Mr. … Clearly, the state court has made greater progress towards resolving the merits of Mr. Hammond’s FMLA claim. Accordingly, this factor weighs in favor of abstention.

Kester v. Social Security Administration Commissioner

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jul 5, 2022

A disability claimant has the burden of establishing her RFC. Vossen, 612 F.3d at 1016. … In addition, while Plaintiff clearly suffers from some degree of pain and discomfort, she has not established she is unable to engage in any and all gainful activity. See Craig v.