Case law

Prunty v. Obregon

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Aug 12, 2025

“Plaintiffs have not cited this Court to a case in which an arresting officer was denied qualified immunity in analogous circumstances, and this Court has found none.” Id. … Government officials are immune from suit unless they violate clearly established rights. Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231 (2009).

Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad v. Arkansas Commerce Commission

243 Ark. 661 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 4, 1967

of such discontinued, * * * agency station, signed by at least twenty-five [25] qualified electors residing in the city, town or political subdivision where the same is located, is filed with the Arkansas Commerce Commission … This testimony falls far short of establishing these approaches or methods as “standard accounting procedures.”

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Mar 20, 1992

The Davis court noted the following conclusion in Krone as to the meaning of "resident" under attachment laws: an established abode, fixed permanently for a time for business or other purpose, although there may be an intent … Rather than clearly deciding, however, that Section 14-14-1306 is the "controlling definition of `residence,'" the Court focused instead upon its concern with the implication that intent is the key element. 304 Ark. at 624

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Oct 22, 2003

Although the law does expressly provide for some use of the resources of the housing agency for the benefit of the Arkansas Water Well Construction Commission (AWWCC), it does not clearly establish the extent to which such … It therefore clearly may use some of its office space to house the AWWCC.

Butler v. State

384 S.W.3d 526 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 13, 2011

The circuit court did not clearly err in rejecting his claim on that basis. II. … A juror is presumed to be unbiased and qualified to serve, and the burden is on the appellant to prove otherwise. Lee v. State, 343 Ark. 702 , 38 S.W.3d 334 (2001).

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Dec 18, 2007

In the first instance, I must determine whether the parties to the Agreement indeed qualify as "public agencies" — a term the Arkansas Code defines in pertinent part as follows: "Public agency" means . . . any political subdivision … In my opinion, a city and a county clearly qualify as "public agencies" under this definition.

Thompson v. Arkansas Social Services

282 Ark. 369 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 7, 1984

First he contends that the lower court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law were clearly erroneous. … Parental rights are not immune from interference by the state in its role of parens patriae. The statute is also not vague.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Feb 7, 2011

addressing an office established by city ordinance pursuant to legislation enacted under the authority of former Ark. … Nor is the question clearly answered by any of the statutes governing district courts.

Scruggs v. Fitzhugh

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Sep 27, 2024

“Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability in a § 1983 action unless the official's conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would have known … Qualified immunity involves the following two-step inquiry: (1) whether the facts shown by the plaintiff make out a violation of a constitutional or statutory right, and (2) whether that right was clearly established at

Brown v. Adams

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Sep 6, 2022

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 … Conclusion The Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because Brown has not established that his constitutional rights were violated.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Mar 20, 2000

Whatever the merits of the association drawn between words in Boston , the case clearly establishes that the Court feels a dwelling can only be real estate. … White's duties quoted above, if the object of his inspection qualifies as a "home," he will clearly be engaged in the profession of "home inspection," since he regularly examines structures for defects and produces reports

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Mar 14, 1991

Yet the court in that case was clearly not faced with a failed proposed millage rate following annexation. … It is well established that although legislative interpretation of constitutional provisions is never binding on the courts, it is persuasive and entitled to some consideration if there is any doubt or ambiguity.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Oct 6, 2008

These provisions clearly support the sharing of information in the course of treatment, where client privacy can reasonably be ensured. … U.L. 585, 630 (2008) (observing that "[b]ecause any student records maintained by an institution's health center almost certainly qualify as student treatment records or "education records" within the meaning of FERPA, these

Johnson v. State

337 Ark. 196 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 8, 1999

Jones conceded that he had never been qualified as an expert witness in any court. The trial court denied Mr. Johnson’s request to qualify Mr. Jones as an expert witness. … The evidence also established that Mr. Johnson refused to submit to breath or field-sobriety tests.

Haller v. Willamowicz

23 Ark. 566 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 15, 1861

, that the articles of partnership, however stringent, are liable, in the view of a court of equity, to be qualified or waived, either pro tanto, or in whole, by the assent oí the partners, expressed or implied from the acts … He was clearly chargeable with the one sum or the other, and being charged with the lesser, he was not prejudiced and cannot complain. The decree is affirmed. Mr. Justice Faikohild did not sit in this case.

Stompingbear v. Robinson

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 29, 2022

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 … (2) if so, was that right clearly established at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct.

May v. Daniels

359 Ark. 100 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 7, 2004

Moreover, the amendment clearly provides the General Assembly with the power to pass further legislation determining the rights, obligations, privileges, and immunities of marriage. … The legal status of unmarried persons is clearly "unmarried." In DHS v.

Griffith v. Sebastian County

49 Ark. 24 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 15, 1886

said defendant, under the Constitution of the State of Arkansas ; for by said Constitution, adopted in 1874, the defendant county is permanently divided into two districts, each exercising all the powers, privileges and immunities … Sebastian County, 21 Ark., 440, has been thought to be decisive of the present case, but it is clearly distinguishable.

State v. Real Estate Bank

5 Ark. 595 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 15, 1844

The principles here laid down clearly show that the first and second replications are bad; We pass by for the'present the third. … The principles heretofore stated, clearly show this replication defective.

Ralls v. Mittlesteadt

268 Ark. 741 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Mar 5, 1980

Article 5, Section 20 of the Arkansas Constitution only grants immunity to the state itself, not to employees of the state. … We are persuaded that the case at bar is clearly not a suit against the state, and is controlled by Kelly v. Wood, supra. See also Ross v. Rich, 210 Ark. 74 , 194 S.W. 2d 297 (1946).