Case law

Ely v. DOLGENCORP, LLC

827 F. Supp. 2d 872 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Oct 25, 2011

The record clearly reflects, however, that removing this “mess” is exactly what Plaintiff viewed as a primary means of making a store more successful. … Whether or not Elyreferred to the manual, he was clearly required to follow it, as the Defendant admits.

Hughes, Guardian v. Edwards

198 Ark. 673 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 3, 1939

Appellant contends that under the first devising clause of the will Willie Sturdivant, was clearly granted the fee absolute in the eighty acre tract and that it was beyond the power of the testatrix by a later provision to … modify or qualify the first provision so as to limit the first grant to a life estate.

Dowden v. Teachers Insurance & Annuity Ass'n (In Re Baxter)

135 B.R. 353 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jan 15, 1992

The CREF Contract provides that “Benefits under this certificate are protected by the following clause contained in the statute of the State of New York establishing CREF: No money or other benefit provided or rendered by … This Court is persuaded by those courts which reach the conclusion that a tax-qualified ERISA pension or profit sharing plan is exempt from the bankruptcy estate under 11 U.S.C. § 541 (c)(2). See Anderson v.

Rosenbaum v. State

131 Ark. 251 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 10, 1917

Therefore, whether the Christian Sabbath be considered as a matter of human or divine origin, we have it established as a potent factor of history with a clear interpretation by him in whose memory it was established as to … The qualifying word “daily” is significant of the kind of necessity. It must be such as is required to meet a daily need.

Kykendall v. Roberts

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Nov 8, 2024

Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for monetary damages unless, at the time of the alleged violation, their conduct violated a clearly established statutory or constitutional right. … do not make out a constitutional violation, Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.

Beebe v. Fountain Lake School District

365 Ark. 536 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 9, 2006

The General Assembly’s legislation permitting excess debt service millage is clearly contrary to the plain meaning of Amendment 74. Lake View, 351 Ark. 31, 89 , 91 S.W.3d 472, 506 (2002). … Frank settlement qualified as a court-order exception under Amendment 74; and (2) the present case was barred by the doctrine of res judicata.

Samantha Ann Skelton (Now Frye) v. Colton Scott Davis; Scott and Sheri Davis; And Joshua Cole Frye

639 S.W.3d 373 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Dec 1, 2021

In recent years, Arkansas statutory law has become more liberal in establishing grandparents’ rights. … For that reason, it is my position that the circuit court clearly erred in finding that Mr.

Newman v. Arkansas Department of Human Services

489 S.W.3d 186 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Apr 13, 2016

Clear and convincing evidence is that degree of proof that will produce in the factfinder a firm conviction as to the allegation sought to be established. Id., 434 S.W.3d at 380. … And clearly, the best practice would have been for the trial court to timely enter its termination decision.

Hackler v. Baker

233 Ark. 690 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 29, 1961

This contention is based on the wording in § 1 of the Amendment which reads: “Any city of the first or second class, any incorporated town, and any county, may issue, by and with the consent of the majority of the qualified … liberally construing the provisions of Amendment No. 49 (if a liberal construction is required) to effectuate its acknowledged purpose, we are following the well recognized rule of constitutional interpretation as it is clearly

Malvern Gravel Co. v. Mitchell

238 Ark. 848 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 21, 1964

That the Malvern Gravel Company is the same as the Malvern & Ouachita River Railroad is abundantly established from the evidence. … On January 21, 1932, Malvern Gravel Company became a Delaware corporation and on January 25, 1932, it qualified to do business in Arkansas, and has so remained.

Guirlando v. City Tel-Coin Company, Inc.

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Sep 29, 2022

A “clearly erroneous” standard of review applies to the portions of a report and recommendation that are not objected to. See Grinder v. … Judge Bryant also found that a determination regarding whether CTC is entitled to qualified immunity cannot be made at this time because the record is insufficient.

Philippe v. Window Glass Cutters League of America

99 F. Supp. 369 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Aug 9, 1951

The procedure to be followed in the case of civil contempt is not so clearly defined. … “It does not lie in their mouths to say that they have an immunity from civil contempt because the plan or scheme which they adopted was not specifically enjoined.

Weatherspoon v. Arkansas Department of Human Services

2013 Ark. App. 104 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Feb 20, 2013

Karen Boyd-Worley, who was qualified as an expert, also testified at the termination hearing. Dr. … On appeal, the appellate court will not reverse the circuit court’s ruling unless its findings are clearly erroneous. Ullom, supra.

Buikema v. McGrew

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Oct 7, 2022

The video of altercation clearly showed me trying to comply. Inmate Stone continued attacking me disregarding Sgt. McGrews orders. Sgt. … immunity.

Humphrey v. Thompson

222 Ark. 884 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 11, 1954

1950 Census, to Establish a Construction Fund and for Other Purposes. . . . … For each such school coming within the provisions of Section 1 there is hereby appropriated out of the General Revenue Fund $200,000 for each such school so qualifying to be used as a construction fund for establishing such

United States v. Bailey

467 F. Supp. 925 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 14, 1979

The government contends that it simply cannot be equitably estopped, that the sovereign, as a part of sovereign immunity, is not subject to principles of equitable estoppel. … Justice clearly demands that the doctrine of equitable estoppel apply in this case.

Devine v. Walker

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Dec 19, 2022

Finally, they argue they are entitled to qualified immunity for individual capacity claims, and there is no evidence of an unconstitutional custom or policy to support an official capacity claim. (Id. at 3). … He is, therefore, is entitled to qualified immunity.

Gregory v. Moose

266 Ark. 926 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Nov 16, 1979

We believe these factors clearly affected the marketability of these lands and that the appraisal in 1978 was tainted by their omission. … In conclusion, it is presumed that a trustee has acted in good faith and the burden of proof rests upon those who question his actions and seek to establish a breach of trust.

Doe v. University of Arkansas - Fayetteville

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Apr 3, 2019

Qualified Immunity UA asserts that the individual capacity defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity “shields 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 would have

Rogers v. Hollenbeck

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jul 2, 2018

immunity may be raised as a defense. … Thus, even if Plaintiff had brought a personal capacity claim, the prison officials would have been entitled to qualified immunity. See Prosser v.