Case law

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.

Conway School District v. Wilhoit

854 F. Supp. 1430 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jun 13, 1994

As discussed above, the express terms of (g)(1) clearly do not provide an exemption for Conway. … Originally, plaintiff was arguing that it qualified for an exemption to the statute, but made no criticism of the fundamental provisions of the statute.

Arkansas State Highway Comm'n v. Diper

249 Ark. 1145 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 22, 1971

Both parties sought to prove market value by qualified experts who had familiarized themselves with existing conditions and were properly permitted to state opinions. … This seems clearly indicative to me of the reliability of such an approach, where the major property value is attributable to buildings.

Prock v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance

99 Ark. App. 381 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Aug 29, 2007

Summary judgment should be granted only when there are clearly no genuine issues of material fact to be litigated and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Riverdale Dev. Co. v. Ruffin Bldg. Sys. … We have established as a guideline of contract interpretation that the different clauses of a contract must be read together and that the contract should be construed so that all parts harmonize.

Employers Insurance of Wausau v. Polar Express, Inc.

780 F. Supp. 610 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Nov 15, 1991

has a qualified endorsement so as to afford Wausau an opportunity to ascertain if it acquiesces to depositing the same. … In contracts for labor only, the payroll shall be established as not less than 90% of the subcontract price. c.

Worth v. City of Rogers

341 Ark. 12 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 13, 2000

Clearly, the evidence before the trial court established the fact that this reappraisal was a countywide reappraisal as set forth in section 26-26-401. … The burden is on the moving party to establish that there are no genuine issues of material fact in controversy. Quirk, 323 Ark. 769 , 918 S.W.2d 138 . Appellees have clearly failed to meet this burden.

Dillard v. Tallant

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · May 29, 2020

On April 13, 2020, Defendants filed the instant summary judgment motion arguing: 1) Defendants did not violate Plaintiff’s constitutional rights; 2) Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity; and 3) Plaintiff has not … Id. 3 3 Because the Court has found Defendants did not violate Plaintiff’s constitutional rights it is not necessary to address the issue of qualified immunity.

Parkins v. Nguyen

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Oct 12, 2018

Plaintiff argues qualified immunity is not appropriate here because he was physically harmed by BCSO officers when he was arrested.’ /d. at 2. … Failure to Train, Official Capacity, and Qualified Immunity Since Plaintiff has failed to establish that he suffered any violations of his constitutional rights as a matter of law, it is unnecessary

Gilbreath v. East Arkansas Planning & Development District, Inc.

471 F. Supp. 912 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · May 24, 1979

In any event, the evidence clearly establishes that the plaintiff failed to conform to the District’s operating policies and procedures and that the plaintiff failed to perform his assigned responsibilities in an acceptable … The overwhelming weight of the evidence clearly establishes that the plaintiff’s termination was predicated on a number of compelling job-related considerations.

Hoard v. Teletype Corp.

450 F. Supp. 1059 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · May 8, 1978

While this treatment by Teletype was demeaning and may well have played a part in his generally unsatisfactory record immediately prior to his discharge, the evidence does not clearly establish that this was the case. … In this case, the plaintiffs sought to establish claims of disparate treatment.

Hill v. Kelly

368 Ark. 200 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 30, 2006

We agreed, interpreting the language of section III(b) of Administrative Order Number 10 and holding [t]here is no history of bonus income, and the trial court acknowledged the uncertainty of whether Kelly would even qualify … We have made it clear that a finding that a material change in circumstances has occurred is subject to a clearly-erroneous standard of review. See id.

Webb v. Bouton

350 Ark. 254 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 3, 2002

P. 59, an appellant may be granted a new trial if “the verdict... is clearly contrary to the preponderance of the evidence or is contrary to the law.” Ark. R. Civ. P. 59(a)(6). … Fengler, as a defense expert witness, to establish causation at trial. The burden of proof to establish causation was upon Webb, the plaintiff. This argument has no merit. Affirmed.

Tarkington v. State

2010 Ark. App. 548 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jun 30, 2010

Craig, 497 U.S. 836 , 110 S.Ct. 3157 , 111 L.Ed.2d 666 (1990), the Supreme Court qualified this guarantee by holding that the right to a face-to-face meeting with witnesses against the defendant at trial may be satisfied … Clearly, the trial court was applying the limitation on appellant’s confrontation right permitted by Maryland, supra, without the prosecutor having established the facts prerequisite for this limitation’s application.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Mar 20, 2008

It is of course well established that a statute should be construed just as it reads, giving the words their ordinary and usually accepted meaning. See, e.g., Todd v. Ligon , 356 Ark. 187 , 148 S.W.3d 229 (2004). … Accordingly, in my opinion the answer to your first question is clearly "no" with regard to a request for leave for the purpose of military training.

Harrison v. Hadley

11 F. Cas. 649 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Arkansas · Jan 13, 1873

But the principle is now established that the circuit court of the United States can exercise jurisdiction in no case solely upon the ground that it falls within the constitutional grant of judicial power to the United States … and ancillary relief, and the reasoning that excludes the jurisdiction of the court over the principal subject matter of the suit applies with equal force to the ancillary and auxiliary relief sought The complainant is clearly

Optical Partners, Inc. v. Dang

381 S.W.3d 46 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 14, 2011

Appellant maintains that it transferred the “goodwill” of its established client base at the mall location to appellee when the lease agreement was signed. Appellant is mistaken. … In bench trials, the standard of review on appeal is not whether there is substantial evidence to support the finding of the court, but whether the judge’s findings were clearly erroneous or clearly against the preponderance

Troeskyn v. Herrington

409 S.W.3d 307 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 31, 2012

establish preference for placement with natural parent, require a finding that the natural parent is unsuitable and not qualified prior to placement with a third party, and burden is always on nonparent to rebut the natural-parent … Failure to accord fit parents a presumption in favor of their decision to terminate a guardianship established by parental consent would penalize their initial decision to establish the guardianship and deter parents from

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Oct 27, 1999

Sections 4(d) (e) of Act 1185 empower the Assessment Coordination Department to establish training, experience, and testing requirements that assessors and others must comply with in order to be qualified to manage the reappraisals … The reappraisal of property upon the basis of which school districts will receive an increased income clearly is a benefit for the schools.

Kemp v. State

324 Ark. 178 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 22, 1996

Timmons is clearly distinguishable. … Many courts, according to this commentator, follow the rule that, where the victim is not a law-enforcement officer, the State must clearly show that prevention of detection and arrest for the offense was the dominant or

In Re Clark

138 B.R. 579 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Arkansas · Dec 17, 1991

Exhibit three does state clearly that the 1984 tax return was received in “Secondary Sort” on May 23, 1990. … The debtors have failed to establish any proof of a postmark.