Case law

Campbell v. Arkansas Department of Human Services

2013 Ark. App. 84 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Feb 13, 2013

She testified that there were families available to adopt the children and that one family in particular had been identified and qualified as an adoptive placement. According to Spencer, adoption was very likely. … We will not reverse the circuit court’s ruling unless its findings are clearly erroneous. Id., 40 S.W.3d 286 .

Lillard v. State

236 Ark. 74 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 11, 1963

The homicide by appellant was established. … We have detailed a sufficient amount of the testimony to establish that appellant’s assignments are without merit.

Hugh Chalmers Chevrolet-Cadillac-Toyota, Inc. v. Lang

55 Ark. App. 26 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Sep 25, 1996

I perceive there is some standard at least established by the Supreme Court, the U.S., as well as local, for reasons of race. … Barfield is clearly against the preponderance of the evidence.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Nov 22, 2006

(d)(1) The board shall have the power to appoint a librarian qualified by education, training, experience, and personality, who shall serve at the will of the board. (2) The board shall have the power to appoint necessary … denoting a shift of all activities relating to library operations from the board to the city council or mayor — a move that I believe would contravene the provisions of title 13, chapter 2, subchapter 5 of the Code, which clearly

Williams v. Arthur J. Arney Co.

240 Ark. 157 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 31, 1966

That the Union will furnish at the request of the contractor duly qualified workmen in the various classifications covered by this Agreement, in sufficient numbers as may be necessary to properly perform work contracted for … Appellees argue that to demand signing of an agreement containing this provision is a violation of Amendment 34 and clearly within the prohibition contained in Kaiser v. Price-Fewell, Inc., 235 Ark. 296 , 359 S.

Snider v. State

2009 Ark. App. 472 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jun 17, 2009

Accordingly, we hold that although the trial judge clearly erred in admitting Blackwell’s videotaped interview, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. … Accordingly, the prejudice clearly outweighed the probative value of the 911 tapes, and therefore, it was error for the trial court to admit the 911 tapes.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · May 23, 2002

I believe adding a "class sponsor 10 th grade" would clearly qualify as an "additional duty." … With respect to your specific example, I believe acting as a 10 th grade sponsor clearly qualifies as an "additional duty" under the statute.

Perry v. Helder

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Aug 27, 2018

Qualified Immunity Analyzing a claim of qualified immunity requires a two-step inquiry. Jones v. McNeese, 675 F.3d 1158, 1161 (8th Cir. 2012). … was clearly established at the time of the violation.”

Janes v. Williams

31 Ark. 175 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 15, 1876

This section is qualified by sec. 4478, so as to dispense with the rule, in case there are many parties who have a common interest, or where they are so numerous as to make it difficult to bring them before the court within … to establish its validity elsewhere.

Graham v. State

365 Ark. 274 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 16, 2006

There are limitless scenarios that might qualify as ‘taking action,’ and the State failed to disprove them.” In essence, Edith argues that, by failing to prove a negative, the State failed to meet its burden of proof. … Thus, the defendant’s awareness of the duty is an element that must be established in order to find a criminal breach of that duty.

Allen v. Helder

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Feb 14, 2022

Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409, 431 (1976), established the absolute immunity of a prosecutor from a civil suit for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 “in initiating a prosecution and in presenting the State’s case.” … prosecutor acting in an investigatory or administrative capacity is only entitled to qualified immunity).

Ralston v. Jones

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · May 6, 2024

established the absolute immunity of a prosecutor from a civil suit for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 “in initiating a prosecution and in presenting the State’s case.” Id. at 427. … entitled to qualified immunity).

Doran v. State

141 Ark. 442 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 12, 1920

No fact having been stated, none could be disproved, and, as the jury might regard these statements as substantial proof of the fact sought to be established, great harm might result, as they are clearly inadmissible for … He did not even qualify his language by saying that “men charged and proved to be guilty should be convicted,” but he called upon them to enforce the statute against men who “were charged with seduction.”

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Mar 4, 2003

As reflected in the passage just quoted, the supreme court has clearly indicated that the entire Lake View litigation will be resolved as of the deadline date. … Amendment 74 declares as a matter of constitutional law that the tax is "established" and mandatory.

Pullen v. Estate of Pullen

249 Ark. 489 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 23, 1970

What we are pointing out is simply that it is not even clear what she intended to do, even if the instrument could qualify as a codicil. … There are two other circumstances, the first of which is rather potent, that clearly indicate the writing to be only a memo. J. E.

Webb v. Bowden

124 Ark. 244 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 14, 1916

Where, however, a city or precinct without adequate cause shows a grossly excessive vote, which is unexplained, it may be cause for reducing the vote to the ordinary, average limit, or, if it cannot he separated, and it is clearly … It abides throughout the trial with the contestants, upon whom rests the duty of establishing the affirmative of the issue which they present.

Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Co. v. Watkins

2011 Ark. App. 388 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · May 25, 2011

Watkins’s request for reimbursement of the Turner settlement and his defense costs and filed this action for a declaratory judgment establishing that it had no duty to defend or indemnify Mr. Watkins. … Farm Bureau asked the trial court to “declare” that no UIM coverage existed under Krouse’s automobile insurance policy for notice failures on her part; it sought to determine a right or immunity on its behalf.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Mar 21, 2007

As previously noted, I harbor some reservations about proposed legislation seeking to impose blanket restrictions on established institutions of higher learning. … As noted above, content-neutral restrictions upon private speech are clearly subject to an intermediate level of scrutiny.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Feb 25, 2004

The laws governing those programs clearly contemplate that the states will redistribute grant funds to the agencies to carry out the programs. See, e.g., 42 U.S.C. § 3026 . … Finally, each must establish a grievance procedure for individuals dissatisfied with or denied services under the plan. 42 U.S.C. § 3026 (a)(6)(P).

Morens v. Dunkin

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Nov 2, 2023

immunity. … And the Court will revisit the issue of qualified immunity based on the jury’s answers.