Case law

Mason v. State

55 Ark. 529 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 5, 1892

The former practice had outlived the day of its usefulness, and a reformed practice was established by the code as more conducive to the practical administration of justice. … The argument upon which they rest is that there is nothing more essential to the public order than that the government be conducted by those chosen for it by the qualified voters, and that any act tending to prevent this

Green v. Carder

282 Ark. 239 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 16, 1984

In their decision, the Board cited the following factors: (1) That the applicant is legally and morally qualified to hold the applied for permit; (2) That the proposed outlet will not greatly reduce the number of parking … If we were to hold otherwise, we would doubtless be substituting our judgment for that of the Board, an exercise in discretion we are clearly not afforded under the rule established in Gordon v. Cummings, supra.

Tully v. Wal-Mart

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jan 16, 2024

However, in a few limited circumstances, a private entity can qualify as a state actor. … To establish diversity jurisdiction, two requirements must be met: (1) the parties must be citizens of different states; and (2) the amount in controversy must exceed $75,000 exclusive of costs and interest. 28 U.S.C.

H. B. Claflin Co. v. Middlesex Banking Co.

113 F. 958 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Arkansas · Feb 19, 1902

The failure of Nugent to qualify as assignee, as prescribed by the laws of the state of Arkansas, prevents him from maintaining an action at law for the possession of the assigned estate. Bartlett v. Teah (C. … The possession of the banking company, and afterwards its vendees, was under a deed valid on its face, and clearly adverse to the original mortgagor and all parties claiming under him or by any other title.

In Re Adoption of Amc

246 S.W.3d 426 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 4, 2007

25 U.S.C.A. § 1912 (f) (2006), which states: No termination of parental rights may be ordered in such proceeding in the absence of a determination, supported by evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, including testimony of qualified … court determined that "[Dennis and Lois] are morally fit to have the custody of the child and are physically and financially able to furnish suitable support, nurture, and education for the child and furthermore desire to establish

Bennett v. McGough

281 Ark. 414 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 21, 1984

I agree we should uphold them unless they are clearly erroneous. In this case the chancellor and the majority of this court are clearly erroneous, in my opinion. … He earns take home pay of $1,600 per month and these children would become covered under his insurance and would qualify for other benefits. The grandparents did visit.

Campbell

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · May 14, 2026

The Court determines that the Campbells have not established a violation of an Arkansas statute, and the argument simply amounts to a disagreement with Judge Taylor’s decisions in Dave Campbell’s criminal case. … Here, prosecutors Smith and Plumlee clearly acted in their capacity as prosecuting attorneys in deciding to file charges against and prosecuting Dave Campbell.

Badger v. Loe

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jul 31, 2019

If necessary, the Court will take up the issue of qualified immunity. A. … Qualified Immunity If a constitutional violation cannot be established, it is unnecessary to conduct a qualified immunity analysis. Saucier v.

Pirani v. Barden

5 Ark. 81 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 15, 1843

Even the tortious taking has sometimes been established by merely proving the detention; because, a person lawfully in possession may frequently become, by his acts, a trespasser ah initio, the trespass extending back to … The sheriff’s return was, therefore, clearly insufficient to authorize a judgment by default. We unintentionally omitted to remark upon the point relative to amending the affidavit.

Novak v. State

287 Ark. 271 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 4, 1985

Ill The next point involves the issue of death qualified juries. We have repeatedly rejected the view taken in Grigsby v. Mabry, 758 F.2d 226 (8th Cir. 1985). Further discussion is pointless. See Rector v. … The face is turned away but some bleeding from the nose is clearly visible. Even so, in a relative sense the scene is not particularly gory.

Padilla v. Archer

2011 Ark. App. 746 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Dec 7, 2011

Bentley had not been qualified as an expert. We hold that the circuit court did not err in ruling that Dr. … Flye also established that he was familiar with the standard of care in similar medical communities. He testified that he grew up in a town of similar size and that he receives patients from similar medical communities.

Harvey v. Ridgeway

248 Ark. 35 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 9, 1970

Under any view taken, Senator Harvey is qualified and eligible to serve as a delegate to the Arkansas Constitutional Convention and at the same time to serve as a state Senator.” … In our opinion, this contention is clearly untenable, and cannot be sustained by the authorities. In a territory, the source of all power is Congress.

Sherry Henson and Clarence Henson v. Kandice Brumble

2021 Ark. App. 130 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Mar 17, 2021

Brumble requested that a visitation schedule be established and a court date set to review the visitation with the ultimate goal being termination of the guardianship and return of KH’s custody to her. … did not meet the requirements for the natural- parent preference as guardian under Arkansas Code Annotated section 28-65-204(a) (Repl. 2012), which provides that “[t]he parents of an unmarried minor, or either of them, if qualified

Farmer v. Newsome

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Oct 6, 2021

Qualified Immunity Having found that the facts do not make out a constitutional violation, the Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. See, e.g., Krout v. … (unless the facts make out a violation of a constitutional right the Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity). D.

Allen v. State

327 Ark. 350 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 17, 1997

State, 314 Ark. 152, 157 , 861 S.W.2d 299, 302 (1993), and taking “nothing ... as intended which is not clearly expressed.” Hales v. … Allen qualified as a “user” of the sewer system or a “contributor of wastewater.” The ordinance establishes that Mr.

Redding v. United States

196 F. Supp. 871 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Aug 8, 1961

Redding’s red cells has not been established. * * * ” (Emphasis added.) … These tests and also the hemolytic reaction to the transfusion involve immune reactions and in all of them *879 the patient’s blood was the common factor.

McCarthy v. Calvary Baptist Ministries, Inc.

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Aug 27, 2025

Charitable immunity provides immunity not only from liability but from suit. Id. (citation omitted). … ’s charitable status, such facts “may be presented to a jury,” after which the court will determine whether those facts establish charitable immunity.

Hoyle v. Priest

59 F. Supp. 2d 827 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jul 30, 1999

. § 7-9-101(8)(Supp.1997). 2 Section 7-9-103(a)(l)(Supp.l997) permits “any person who is a qualified elector of the State of Arkansas” to sign an initiative petition. … It is concise and straightforward: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the

Smith v. Tallant

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Apr 16, 2024

To establish standing to sue, Plaintiff must show he “suffered an injury in fact that is fairly traceable to the defendant’s challenged action.” Cross v. Fox, 23 F.4th 797, 800 (8th Cir. 2022). … 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

Pledger v. Troll Book Clubs, Inc.

316 Ark. 195 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 7, 1994

Such instructions fall far short of establishing authorization and control. … In my opinion, teachers soliciting on behalf of Troll Book Clubs, Inc. might well qualify as representatives, canvassers, and so forth under the statute.