Case law

Thompson v. Baker

133 F. Supp. 247 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Aug 19, 1955

Apparently this is the first case in which the question of the immunity of sheriffs or constables has been raised in a case based on the Civil Rights Act, but the above cited decisions clearly chart the course for the Court … The Court can perceive of no reason why the long-established immunity of a constable serving a writ should be in any degree inferior to the immunity of quasi-judicial officers, wardens, or prothonotaries, and the Court is

Key v. Curry

473 S.W.3d 1 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 29, 2015

Therefore, this argument likewise cannot be considered as a basis for establishing an exception to sovereign immunity in this case. … This court held that the allegations did not establish a sovereign- immunity exception.

Robinson v. City of Ashdown

301 Ark. 226 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 29, 1990

The city defended on the basis of its sovereign immunity. The trial court sustained a demurrer to the complaint. … Although injury to property through negligence or trespass does not, without more, qualify as a taking, it has been held that a continuing trespass or nuisance can ripen into inverse condemnation.

Scamardo v. SPARKS REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER

375 Ark. 300 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 19, 2008

Sparks subsequently filed a motion for summary judgment, alleging that it qualified for charitable immunity under the eight factors listed in George, supra, and arguing that it was not a proper party defendant. … Turning to the question of Sparks’s entitlement to charitable immunity, Scamardo argues that “Sparks does not qualify for the charitable immunity defense because it was not created and maintained exclusively for charity.”

Ark. State Plant Bd. v. McCarty

576 S.W.3d 473 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 13, 2019

The circuit court also determined that the Farmers alleged no facts with respect to their administrative rulemaking appeal that would establish an exception to sovereign immunity. … Although the State raised sovereign immunity as a defense, we stated that [b]ecause appellee has asserted that Act 633 violates qualified voters' constitutional right to vote and seeks declaratory and injunctive relief, not

MARZIALE v. BROWN

Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Oct 8, 2025

This is known as statutory immunity. To determine whether a state actor is entitled to statutory immunity, “the court has traditionally been guided by the federal standard for qualified immunity.” Koontz v. … Therefore, Brown “is entitled to qualified immunity unless (1) [appellants have] alleged facts that demonstrate the deprivation of an actual constitutional right, and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of

Sexton v. Arkansas Supreme Court Committee on Professional Conduct

725 F. Supp. 1051 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Nov 22, 1989

The court held that the denial of qualified immunity was immediately appealable, because the right to such immunity “is an immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability; and, like an absolute immunity, it is … Accordingly, the court finds that defendant’s qualified immunity defense is wholly without merit. C.

Helena-West Helena School District v. Monday

361 Ark. 82 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 3, 2005

The qualified immunity claim is a claim of right which is separable from, and collateral to, rights asserted in the complaint. . . .” Robinson, 291 Ark. at 482-83 . … The immunity for negligent torts afforded to school districts and to school employees, however, is qualified, and an employee or a district can be sued to the extent that applicable coverage exists under a policy of insurance

Ark. State Highway Comm. v. Fowler

240 Ark. 595 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 4, 1966

A recent decision is clearly applicable: Arkansas State Highway Commission v. Russell, 240 Ark. 21 , 398 S. W. 2d 201 . … As the owner he is clearly competent to express his opinion of the before and after value of his property.

Myers v. Yamato Kogyo Co.

578 S.W.3d 296 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · May 29, 2019

be a principal or stockholder of an immune employer. … Strict construction is narrow construction and requires that nothing be taken as intended that is not clearly expressed. Id.

American Trucking Ass'n v. Gray

288 Ark. 488 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 14, 1986

The Highway Department established a mechanism where a carrier could either qualify and pay the HUE tax or formally declare a gross weight below 73,281 pounds and obtain a free specialty carrier decal. … We do not find the chancellor’s finding of fact that no common fund was established to be clearly erroneous. Ark. R. Civ. P. 52(a). Accordingly we affirm his judgment. Affirmed. Purtle, J., not participating.

Seth v. St. Edward Mercy Medical Center

375 Ark. 413 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 22, 2009

This court has clearly stated that “charitable immunity is an affirmative defense that must be specifically pled.” Neal v. Sparks Reg’l Med. Ctr., 375 Ark. 46 , 289 S.W.3d 8 (2008) (citing Felton, supra). St. … In December 2005, this court handed down its decision in Low, supra, holding that a qualified charitable entity was immune from suit as well as liability, and that the Arkansas direct-action statute, Ark.Code Ann. § 23-79

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Oct 10, 1995

Moreover, the official who decided to release the records will not be held liable if that decision was merely negligent, and he or she may also be able to assert qualified immunity. … . § 19-10-305 (a) (Repl. 1994). 3 The test of "qualified immunity" for individual officers turns upon the "objective legal reasonableness of the action" assessed in light of the legal rules that were "clearly established"

American Humanist Ass'n v. Baxter County

143 F. Supp. 3d 816 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Nov 12, 2015

“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … established to overcome qualified immunity.

Cherokee Nation Businesses, LLC Legends Resort and Casino, LLC And the Arkansas Racing Commission v. Gulfside Casino Partnership And Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma

2023 Ark. 153 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 26, 2023

. § 23-117-101 (Repl. 2015), and established an application period that ran from May 1 through May 30, 2019. … Gulfside submitted a letter notifying the ARC of its challenge to Legends’ status as a qualified applicant because it had “no gaming experience.”

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Jun 9, 2003

. § 14-78-108 provides qualified immunity for municipal officials for conduct taken without "corrupt intent" in connection with an Amendment 78 loan. … Although I consider this qualified immunity as affording a great deal more than "cold comfort," I am not prepared to opine that it entails immunity from any and all "other accounting, budgeting and fiscal responsibility laws

Culpepper v. Smith

302 Ark. 558 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 25, 1990

By his testimony, he establishes that he engages in criminal practice. … But the alternative of qualifying a Prosecutor’s immunity would deserve the broader public interest.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Apr 25, 1989

It is my opinion that both positions enjoy qualified immunity; meaning that both are immune from suit when sued in their official capacities for acts committed in the performance of their official duties. … The immunity is qualified because it does not obtain where the activity is in violation of clearly established law which a reasonable person would have known. Matthews v.

George v. Jefferson Hosp. Ass'n, Inc.

337 Ark. 206 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 8, 1999

Of the eight factors listed above, three are clearly established based upon evidence in the record. Those three are 1, 2, and 7. … JRMC’s size and complexity make knowledgeable, well-qualified personnel essential. Such persons do not readily volunteer their services or serve at rates of compensation markedly lower than market rates.

Perkins v. Cross

562 F. Supp. 85 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Apr 29, 1983

It fails to raise the affirmative defense of qualified immunity, which protects police officers who make an arrest in good faith and for probable cause. … The law is clear that the qualified immunity defense must be affirmatively pled, which was not done in this case. Gomez v.