Case law

Stephens v. Martin

491 S.W.3d 451 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 27, 2014

During that review, more than 3,000 signatures were disqualified, and the Secretary of State notified GARN on July 18 that the petition did not meet the signature requirements established in article 5, section 1. … We will accept the master’s findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous. See Roberts v. Priest, 334 Ark. 503, 975 S.W.2d 850 (1998).

Jackson v. M.F.A. Mutual Insurance

169 F. Supp. 633 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Dec 1, 1958

Co., supra, are summarized here together with additional facts established at the second hearing. … The rule is thus stated at page 574, section 213, 2 C.J.: ‘It is essential to the application of the above general rule (as to apparent authority) that two important facts be clearly established: (1) that the principal held

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Jun 30, 1992

In my opinion, Section 17-50-102 clearly sets out all of the exceptions that qualify, and contains no ambiguity. Additionally, in Gosnell v. … It is well established that an administrative agency may determine the particular facts and circumstances upon which operation of a legislative enactment is conditioned. See Hogue v.

Harmon v. Payne

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jan 7, 2025

immunity. … However, because the state of the law was not clearly established at the time of the search in Wilson, the Supreme Court held that the defendant officers in that case were entitled to qualified immunity.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Sep 5, 1990

following question in this regard: Are vocational technical schools, such as Pine Vocational Technical School, required to give preference to blind persons for operating vending facilities on their premises, or do they qualify … I do not believe that a court would conclude in this instance that the agency's interpretation of 22-3-1302 (1) is clearly wrong.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Aug 1, 2003

This procedure clearly has no applicability, however, in the case of a regional airport authority created pursuant to A.C.A. § 14-362-101 et seq. (1987 and Supp. 2001). … , may not be removed "except for cause . . . or upon such other conditions as shall be set forth in the agreement establishing the authority."

Taylor v. State

470 S.W.3d 271 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 1, 2015

appeal, he argues that the circuit court erred in denying his Rule 37 petition because appellate counsel’s failure to appeal the trial court’s ruling that prohibited him from inquiring of the victims about any plea or immunity … It is petitioner’s responsibility in a Rule 37.1 petition to establish that the issue was raised at trial, that the trial court erred in its ruling on the issue, and that an argument concerning the issue could have been

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Oct 16, 1997

The answer to the first part of your first question is, clearly, "yes," in accordance with A.C.A. § 14-43-309 which provides in relevant part that "[i]n all general elections for alderman in cities of the first class, the … Att'y Gen. 92-112 at 2 (regarding some of the factors looked at to determine whether a person has the requisite intent to establish a domicile in a particular place).

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Jan 4, 2007

Given that you are a city employee, I believe documents containing the requested information clearly qualify as "public records" under this definition. As my predecessor noted in Op. Att'y Gen. … The FOIA does not define the phrase "clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy."

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Apr 1, 2008

Given that the record is kept by the City and the subject matter involves the performance of official functions, I believe the document in question clearly qualifies as a "public record" under this definition. … Given that exemptions from disclosure must be narrowly construed, it is the burden of an individual resisting disclosure to establish that his "privacy interests outweighed that of the public's under the circumstances presented

City of Gravette v. Centerton Waterworks and Sewer Commission and City of Centerton

2019 Ark. App. 540 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Nov 13, 2019

Centerton’s motion for summary judgment asserted sovereign immunity; it argued that the plain language of Arkansas Code Annotated section 14-208-102 rendered it inapplicable; and that it was categorically entitled to protection … The qualifying federal loans made to rural districts are “to provide for the application or establishment of soil conservation practices, shifts in land use, the conservation, development, use, and control of

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Aug 21, 2008

In other words, the DOT has established as the "only driving prohibition period for a controlled substances violation," the "completion of rehabilitation requirements and a return-to-duty test with a negative result," id. … and absolutely immune from liability under another . . .") .

Cannady v. St. Vincent Infirmary Medical Center

537 S.W.3d 259 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 8, 2018

Accordingly, the circuit court’s conclusion that this threshold issue was a factual 117question for the jury was clearly erroneous. … It violates the separation of powers for this court to create law that completely immunizes an employer against vicarious liability if the |1Remployer promulgates a policy that proscribes a certain behavior.

Williams v. Payne

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Aug 8, 2025

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

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Apr 10, 2001

However, I believe this general power is qualified by an implied proviso that the contract serve some legitimate public purpose. … Moreover, I believe loaning a van to a church would clearly violate U.S. Const. amend. I , which prohibits any government action "respecting an establishment of religion," and Ark. Const. art.

Burge

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Apr 2, 2026

The Court must also weigh all factual allegations in favor of the plaintiff, unless the facts alleged are clearly baseless. Denton v. Hernandez, 504 U.S. 25, 32 (1992). II. … Consequently, Plaintiff has not established that he is a qualified individual with a disability. As a result, Plaintiff’s ADA claim fails. B.

Long v. Smith

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 28, 2022

constitutional . . . right; and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation.’” 133 Under Supreme Court precedent, a right is clearly established when “‘[t]he contours of [a] right [are] sufficiently … Defendants do not point to any state-law grounds for qualified immunity. Instead, Defendants’ entire qualified immunity argument rests on federal law. Id. at 9– 11.

Bailey v. State

204 Ark. 376 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 25, 1942

The court is authorized to determine the truth of the matter, and he is certainly better qualified to pass on the application for a change of venue than is any one else. … criminal cases that the presumption of law is that a defendant can get a fair and impartial trial in the county in which the offense was committed, and that in order to overcome this presumption the defendant must show clearly

Powhatan Cemetery, Inc. v. Colbert

104 Ark. App. 290 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Feb 4, 2009

— are clearly erroneous. … Appellees maintain that the trial court’s findings are not clearly erroneous.

Daniels Ex Rel. Daniels v. Lutz

407 F. Supp. 2d 1038 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Dec 27, 2005

Lutz’s intent, either of which arguably might void the qualified privilege. See Hinson v. Holt, 776 So.2d 804, 810-11 (Aa.Civ.App.1998). … Rather, the testimony of a qualified medical professional would be required. 4 .