Case law

Don Randall Jackson (Deceased) v. Smiley Sawmill, LLC; And Technology Insurance Co.

638 S.W.3d 11 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Nov 10, 2021

An employer who has secured for its employees the benefits of workers’ compensation is immune from liability for damages in a tort action brought by an injured employee. Truman Arnold Co. v. Miller Cnty. Cir. … The “mandate rule” is a subset of the law-of-the-case doctrine, which provides that the decision of an appellate court establishes the law of the case for the trial court upon remand and for the appellate court itself

Wilson v. Wilson

294 Ark. 194 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 21, 1987

Rawleigh Ralls, president of Educational Research Associates, Inc., was qualified as an expert regarding economics, finance and statistics. … Thus, whether goodwill is marital property is a fact question and a party, to establish goodwill as marital property and divisible as such, must produce evidence establishing the salability or marketability of that goodwill

Russell v. Adams

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jul 10, 2024

Personal capacity claims “are those which allege personal liability for individual actions by officials in the course of their duties; these claims do not require proof of any policy and qualified immunity may be raised … The Court specifically advised Plaintiff, in its January 30, 2024 Order, he must respond to Defendants’ Motion with evidence establishing a genuine issue of material fact pursuant to Federal Rule 56(e).

Ackerman v. Citizens Bank

262 Ark. 228 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Sep 26, 1977

Ackerman for federal estate tax purposes and all qualified for the marital deduction. … None contain the restrictive language used in the trust established by Mrs. Ackerman.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Feb 13, 2009

purposes prescribed in this subchapter or for the operation of tourist-oriented facilities, including, but not limited to, theme parks and other family entertainment facilities or for the retirement of bonds issued for the establishment … In my opinion, the reference to "such groups" in this passage is to "any civic group or the chamber of commerce" mentioned immediately before in A.C.A. § 26-75-603 (c)(2)(C) — institutions that would not qualify as the lenders

Johnson v. State

120 Ark. 193 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 4, 1915

In both cases, the court clearly announces that under such an instruction in a charge for murder; the burden of proof never shifts to the defendant to establish his innocence by a preponderance of the evidence on any phase … We have carefully examined this evidence as set forth in the record, and can not say that the court erred in holding that the jurors were qualified.

Jackson v. Pitts

93 Ark. App. 466 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Dec 14, 2005

In bench trials, the standard of review on appeal is whether the judge’s findings were clearly erroneous or clearly against the preponderance of the evidence. Found. Telecomms., Inc. v. … The testimony of the parties in this case clearly shows a relationship between appellant Jackson and Moore sufficient to establish liability for trespass and destruction of timber by a preponderance of the evidence.

American Sheet Metal Works, Inc. v. Con-Ark Builders, Inc.

276 Ark. 366 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 21, 1982

And Con-Ark insists that American Sheet Metal Works was not licensed and qualified. … If a litigant under our system is to be deprived of the opportunity to present his cause to a jury on the basis of an adverse rule of law, it ought to be possible (and essential) to clearly state what that rule is and where

City of Centerton v. City of Bentonville

375 Ark. 439 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 30, 2009

Bentonville sued Centerton, alleging that West Island failed to comply with the requirements qualifying the land for annexation by Centerton under Arkansas Code Annotated section 14-40-302(a). … Clearly, the land south of Motley Road was only annexed to obtain the “whole island.” Ben-tonville showed that there was no municipal purpose in annexing the property south of Motley Road.

Waddle v. Sargent

313 Ark. 539 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 21, 1993

Judge Rogers, elected, qualified, and acting Circuit-Chancery Judge of the 11th Judicial District, was assigned by the Chief Justice as the judge to hear petitioner's case after the elected, qualified, and acting Circuit … In any case, the opinion clearly limited the prohibitions of the special judge's action to rendering the decree and did not otherwise invalidate the proceedings.

Bly v. State

267 Ark. 613 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 28, 1980

He contends the finding of the jury, during the mitigation stage of the first trial, that Burns was killed by someone other than the appellant, brings this doctrine into force thereby causing appellant to be immune from prosecution … It seems the testimony of the witnesses clearly showed the vehicle was in essentially the same condition as it was when the appellant departed possession of it.

Martin v. Hefley

259 Ark. 484 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 8, 1976

She further testified that she and her husband had not established a home but that both lived with his parents part of the time and with her parents part of the time. … But that section of the statute clearly requires that the application be made only on the form set out in the act. That form is set out in Ark.Stat.Ann. § 3-905 (Supp.1973).

Montgomery County v. Cearley

192 Ark. 868 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 15, 1936

The next ground urged for reversal is that the case was submitted to a jury of less than twelve qualified jurors, and that the verdict was signed by the foreman only. … statute of limitations, unless it has clearly manifested its intention to be so bound.

Thomas v. Meadors

527 S.W.3d 724 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Sep 6, 2017

But the inquiry on appeal is not whether Thomas established a prima facie case of medical negligence but whether Meadors established a prima facie entitlement to summary judgment in her motion. … The expert testimony cited by Thomas fails to clearly articulate that Meadors’s negligence was the proximate cause of Mr. Thomas’s death; instead, Dr. Beacham opined that Mr.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Nov 23, 1999

(B) Thereupon, it shall be the duty of the Governor to at once appoint and commission a mayor or police judge for the city or town to fill the vacancy until his successor is elected at the next regular election and qualified … Although state law does not explicitly address this issue, it clearly does not prohibit an expenditure of this nature, assuming that the funds were duly appropriated.

Altus-Denning School District No. 31 v. Franklin County

568 F. Supp. 95 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jun 1, 1983

In addition, the Plaintiff School Districts have the power to levy property taxes, subject to the vote of a majority of the qualified voters. Ark.Stat.Ann. § 80-602 et seq., Ark. Const. amend. 40. … However, 31 U.S.C. § 1601 provides clearly that “[s]uch payments may be used by such unit for any governmental purpose.” “Such unit” refers to “unit of local government” as defined in section 1606(c).

City of Batesville v. Grace

259 Ark. 493 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 15, 1976

This is contrary to Article 4 of our constitution which prohibits intrusion by the judiciary upon the legislative domain. *** “However, zoning regulations and ordinances are not immune to appellate review. … First, his opinion on June 10 clearly shows that he focused on the question of the arbitrariness of the mayor’s veto, instead of the action by the city —- the refusal to override the veto.

Ark. St. Bd. of Elec. Comm'rs v. PCEC

Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 14, 2014

The procedure established by the ASBEC for absentee voters is similar to that established by the General Assembly in Ark. Code Ann. § 7-5-321 (Supp. 2013), for in-person voters who fail to present proof of identity. … The General Assembly clearly knew how to provide a remedy to absentee voters.

Duncan v. State

38 Ark. App. 47 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Apr 15, 1992

The fact that parts were stolen from the stripped vehicle was clearly established, as was their value. … Appellant next contends that the trial court abused its discretion in holding that Bauer was qualified to testify as an expert witness. We do not agree.

Hawkins v. Filkins

24 Ark. 286 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 15, 1866

This is plainly shown by the powers enumerated : “ to lay and collect taxes“ to borrow money“ to regulate commerce;” “to coin money;” “to establish post offices and post roads;” “ to establish courts, inferior to the supreme … These authorities, as well as others to which we have had reference, very clearly establish two propositions: 1.