Case law

Fletcher v. Scorza

359 S.W.3d 413 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 12, 2010

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. See id. … In Freeman, we rejected Freeman’s argument that “the natural-parent preference must prevail unless it is established that the natural parent is unfit,” observing that “[Stamps v.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Mar 2, 2009

Given that the record(s) at issue are kept by the police department and the subject matter involves the suspension of a police department employee, I believe the records(s) clearly qualify as "public records" under this definition … Assuming, however, that some or all the documents qualify as "personnel records," they must be released unless their release constitutes a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

Scott v. Consolidated Health Management, Inc.

297 Ark. 601 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 13, 1989

Third, it is argued that the decision is clearly against the preponderance of the evidence. 1. Jurisdiction a. … However, we also wrote: “Since appellee submitted its application during the effective dates of Act 593, it qualified for the exception to the permit of approval requirement.”

Autry v. Beckham

450 S.W.3d 247 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Dec 3, 2014

We review probate proceedings de novo on the record but will not reverse a circuit court’s factual determinations unless they are clearly erroneous. 6 A finding is clearly erroneous when, although there is evidence to support … the words their ordinary meaning and usually accepted meaning in common language. 16 lfiArkansas Code Annotated section 28-65-212 uses the word “shall” which is typically mandatory; however, appellees note that it is well-established

Johnson v. Griffie

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 4, 2021

“Qualified immunity shields a government official from liability when his conduct does not violate ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” Krout v. … To determine if an official is entitled to the protection of qualified community the Court must determine: 1) if the facts alleged or shown establish a violation of a constitutional right; and 2) that right was clearly

Frazier v. USA

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Aug 12, 2022

Qualified immunity protects government officials from § 1983 liability for damages if their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity if: (1) the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to Plaintiff, does not establish a violation of a constitutional right; or (2) the constitutional right was not clearly

Rose v. Gibson

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Apr 27, 2022

Collins, Hodges, and Ellis are entitled to qualified immunity on that claim, however, because Rose’s constitutional right against malicious prosecution was not clearly established when he was arrested … The officers are entitled to qualified immunity on this record in any event.

Raymond Douglas Hardy v. Singleton

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Nov 7, 2024

“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. … 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

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Dec 23, 2003

to Amendment 29, which authorizes the governor to fill vacancies in various elective offices, but rather pursuant to A.C.A. § 16-17-105 (c), which provides: When there is a vacancy in the office of municipal judge in an established … In my opinion, section 16(D) clearly qualifies section 7(D) of amendment 80, authorizing service in two counties only if (1) the two counties served are contiguous, (2) the county adjacent to the county from which the judge

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Nov 18, 2002

Until I receive a version of your proposed agreement that clearly states what Section VIII would require, I cannot meaningfully opine whether its provisions are objectionable on some substantive ground. … However, I will note that I would approach with grave reservations any proposed provision that would obligate an agency of this state to waive sovereign immunity without clear legislative sanction, to hold harmless an agency

Bill Paschall, Individually and on Behalf of Arkansans for Patient Access, a Ballot Question Committee v. John Thurston, in His Capacity as Arkansas Secretary of State, and Jim Bell, Individually and on Behalf of Protect Arkansas Kids, a Ballot Question Committee, Intervenor

699 S.W.3d 352 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 21, 2024

Given these definitions, a wide range of groups or people can qualify as “the sponsor.” … One need not be a “qualifying patient,” and one need not have a “qualifying medical condition.” Possession and use of one ounce of marijuana would be legal for all purposes.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Feb 25, 2009

Given that the record(s) at issue are kept by the police department and the subject matter involves the suspension of a police department employee, I believe the record(s) clearly qualify as "public records" under this definition … Documents prepared by medical personnel for the purpose of diagnosing or treating an individual are clearly medical records.

Crowley v. Lemons

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jun 24, 2025

not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person [in their positions] would have known.” … ; and (2) whether the right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Aug 6, 1997

Although the current appointees serve at large, the relevant legislation clearly envisions the election of the additional judgeships from districts by the "qualified electors" of the districts. … Although at their creation, the judgeships became appointive positions, the legislative scheme clearly envisions that their successors will at some point be "elected and qualified," which is the pertinent language of art.

Lagreca v. Cotton

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · May 21, 2025

However, my constitutionally adequate detainee disciplinary rights were clearly established by UCSO and my due process rights and equal protection of law rights were clearly established under the 14th … 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

Shores v. Lively

492 S.W.3d 81 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · May 4, 2016

Therefore, we hold that the circuit court did not clearly err in determining ]flthe Livelys established a significant and viable relationship with K.L.1, The question answer to whether the Livelys established a significant … Best Interest Even though the circuit court did not clearly err in finding the Livelys had established |sa significant and viable relationship with the children, we hold that this case must be reversed because the Livelys

Diamante, LLC v. Dye

430 S.W.3d 710 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 5, 2013

The circuit court also found that the proposed class exceeded 330 property owners and that the proposed class was clearly defined and unambiguous. … Whether class counsel is qualified and will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class is addressed by Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a)(4).

Tennant v. Trotter

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 7, 2022

to the plaintiff, demonstrate the deprivation of a constitutional or statutory right; and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation.” … Therefore, Defendant Trotter is entitled to qualified immunity, and the claims against him will be dismissed. 2.

Buchanan v. Pierce

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jul 29, 2024

Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person [in their positions … so, was that right clearly established at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Apr 30, 2002

However, establishing as much does not necessarily mean that the meetings of the UACCH Board of Visitors must be open and announced. … Applying these statutes, if UACCH qualifies as a governmental entity, its records as defined are subject to disclosure.