Case law

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Feb 27, 2009

*Page 3 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 … 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.

Stanley v. Gray

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Sep 27, 2023

“Qualified immunity shields public officials from liability for civil damages if their conduct did not ‘violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” … Qualified Immunity, Official Capacity Claims, & Respondeat Superior Defendants argue that Plaintiff’s failure to establish a constitutional violation entitles them to qualified immunity for his excessive force claim.

Smith v. State

218 Ark. 725 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 9, 1951

The facts in the instant case are clearly distinguishable from those in the case of Patton v. Mississippi, 332 U. S. 463 , 68 S. Ct. 184 , 92 L. … We have held that flight of the accused is admissible as a circumstance in corroboration of evidence tending to establish guilt. Stevens v. State, 143 Ark. 618 , 221 S. W. 186 .

Worthen Bank & Trust Co., N.A. v. Hilyard Drilling Co. (In Re Hilyard Drilling Co.)

74 B.R. 5 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Oct 14, 1986

The debtor contends that the testimony adduced at the hearing clearly established that the sales were in the normal course of its business. … Such price was established at his discretion. Creditors had no input into the valuation of these assets.

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Stotts

74 Ark. App. 428 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Oct 10, 2001

establishes the causal connection." … Thrash's report contained no qualifying words, such as, maybe, or possibly, regarding appellee's injury. Dr. Thrash simply found that appellee had suffered the injuries. We hold that Dr.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Dec 30, 1994

. `993) establishes the following requirements for authorized bonding companies: (a) All bonds enumerated in § 22-9-401 shall be made by surety companies which have qualified and are authorized to do business in the State … Supp. l993) clearly requires that surety bonds mandated by the State of Arkansas for public works projects shall be issued by resident local (Arkansas) agents licensed to represent their sureties who shall file with these

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Feb 3, 2006

If one of the offers is from a non-profit corporation, with the intention of establishing a private school, may the District reject that bid on the basis that the establishment of a private school within the District's boundaries … I believe those purposes clearly qualify as effecting a "public advantage" to education consistent with the provisions of Article 14, § 1.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Jun 30, 2008

Given that the subjects of the request are city employees, 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."

Yamaha Motor Corp., U.S.A. v. Richard's Honda Yamaha

344 Ark. 44 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 1, 2001

We have also held that the testimony of the legislators with respect to their intent in introducing legislation is clearly inadmissible. Board of Trustees v. City of Little Rock, 295 Ark. 585 , 750 S.W.2d 950 (1988). … Stroud was not qualified to testify as to the intent of the legislature in adopting the act. We hold that allowing Ms.

Pedraza v. Circuit Court of Drew County

426 S.W.3d 441 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 14, 2013

The court, by letter, informed the parties that both death-qualified defense attorneys were required to be present at all stages of the proceedings. … |gWe conclude that Pedraza is not entitled to a writ of certiorari in this instance because he clearly has another adequate remedy at law, an appeal.

Hamilton v. Love

328 F. Supp. 1182 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jun 2, 1971

Plaintiffs allege deprivations, under col- or of state law, of rights, privileges and immunities, secured by the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States. … The final decision may, indeed, rest with the qualified voters of the governmental unit involved.

Brown v. Novak

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 5, 2019

All of the individual-capacity Defendants have asserted the defense of qualified immunity against these claims. … When courts perform this qualified-immunity analysis, it is often preferable to consider the “violation” prong before considering the “clearly established” prong, but it is not mandatory for them to do so.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Jul 11, 1994

Howard serves as Tuckerman Municipal Judge, provides that when there is a vacancy in the office of municipal judge by virtue of the failure of any qualified attorney to be elected or by reason of the absence of a qualified … Montgomery's question references A.C.A. 14-51-202 (b)(1) (2), I assume that the Newport Civil Service Commission was established pursuant to A.C.A. 14-51-101 et seq., which authorizes cities of the first class to establish

Burt v. Arkansas Livestock & Poultry Commission

278 Ark. 236 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 24, 1983

Apparently this argument is bottomed on the indemnity schedule established by the United States Department of Agriculture pursuant to 21 U.S.G.A. 114 (a). … We also agree that the state cannot create different classifications on the basis of criteria wholly unrelated to the purpose for which the classification is established.

Streight v. Ragland

280 Ark. 206 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 25, 1983

It provides: "Privileges and Immunities— Equality.—The General Assembly shall not grant to any citizen or class of citizens privileges or immunities which upon the same terms shall not equally belong to all citizens." … Here we must exercise judicial restraint under the well settled principle of stare decisis, deferring to established reason.

In re Southwest Enterprises, Inc.

261 F. Supp. 721 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Dec 21, 1966

The evidence clearly establishes that Tex-Iron, Inc., is operating as a perfectly healthy, solvent and fairly prosperous corporation and it, therefore, cannot be considered a proper subject for reorganization under Chapter … These losses, in the opinion of the Court, clearly establish the fact that both corporations are hopelessly insolvent, and are ineligible for Chapter X proceedings.

Petersen v. Dean

102 Ark. App. 215 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Apr 30, 2008

I find that the loss of the relationship between the petitioners and [KP] continues to be likely to harm the child and that it would clearly be in her best interest for that relationship to be re-established. … Appellant contends that these witnesses were not mental health professionals and thus were not qualified to offer an opinion on this matter.

First Commercial Bank v. Meyer

289 Ark. 345 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 30, 1986

Construction Company established a profit sharing plan for its employees. The plan was qualified under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). 29 U.S.C. 1001 et seq. Duane T. … On the facts before us, we cannot say the chancellor was clearly wrong because evidently Scherr did misinterpret his instructions. That was the judgment of the chancellor.

Michael E. Rea v. Wendy Kelley, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction

2020 Ark. 347 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 29, 2020

Rea’s challenge does not establish a basis for the writ to issue. … Rea failed to establish that the circuit court erred by denying habeas relief. Affirmed.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Nov 6, 2001

RESPONSE It is my opinion that the provision for the hiring of staff members by the County Attorney is clearly unconstitutional. … But clearly, the County Judge is vested exclusively with the duty and responsibility for hiring county employees.