Case law

Lenard v. Kelley

519 S.W.3d 682 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 18, 2017

the application of the doctrine of sovereign immunity. … Here, Lenard’s allegation that he was erroneously convicted of a disciplinary infraction in 2014 does not establish that the ADC acted without statutory authority.

John v. Faitak

575 S.W.3d 452 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Apr 10, 2019

He admitted that the circuit court "clearly explained the role of [appellee] in carrying out" its orders, that "any 'position' [appellee] took was a direct result of a fair and impartial review of the information provided … Immunity was not raised in appellee's answer.

William Durden v. City of Van Buren

635 S.W.3d 342 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Sep 22, 2021

They argued that Durden failed to establish any constitutional violation that would support his ACRA claims because Officer Dugan had probable cause to arrest Durden, precluding any constitutional violation. … The appellees explained that Officer Dugan is entitled to qualified immunity in 2 his individual capacity as to the ACRA claims, and finally, they contended that Durden has

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Mar 18, 1992

It should also be noted that the Youth Services Board, as an establishment of state government, will be entitled to the immunity granted by Arkansas Constitution, art 5 , § 20 . … Different consideration, however, will apply in federal court, where "qualified immunity" is the rule. See e.g. Fogle v. Benton County Scan, 665 F.Supp. 729 (W.D. Ark 1987).

Ark. State Police Ret. Sys. v. Sligh

2017 Ark. 209 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 30, 2017

Sovereign immunity is jurisdictional immunity from suit. Kelley v. Johnson, 2016 Ark. 266, 496 S.W.3d 346. … Although appellees indicated in their complaint that they were seeking both “legal and equitable” remedies, the nature of the relief sought was clearly for monetary damages, as even the writ of mandamus and the injunction

Steve's Auto Center of Conway, Inc., and Steven Gafner v. Arkansas State Police; Director William J. Bryant, Individually; And Capt. Alex Finger, Individually

592 S.W.3d 695 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 6, 2020

ASP is required by law to “establish, maintain, and enforce a towing rotation list to assist in clearing highways of motor vehicles” involved in accidents or abandoned on state highways. Ark. … Accordingly, this clearly violates the separation of powers. Ark. Const. art. 4, §§ 1, 2. This constitutional violation is patently unlawful and ultra vires.

Gray

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jul 28, 2026

Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity and summary judgment. … Qualified immunity shields a government official from liability when his conduct does not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Harlow v.

Hammers v. State

261 Ark. 585 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 16, 1977

Clearly a promise of immunity approved by, or with the consent of, the court, should be upheld. See State v. Ward, 112 W. Va. 552 , 165 S.E. 803 , 85 ALR 1175 (1932); Lowe v. State, supra. … That statute was passed for the very purpose of establishing guidelines to facilitate prosecutions and to clarify the authority of the prosecuting attorney to grant immunity in cases such as this. See preamble.

Leslie Miller, Inc. v. State

225 Ark. 285 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 4, 1955

The facts in these cases clearly show that the appellants are independent contractors. … An independent contractor is not clothed with governmental immunity solely because of his contractual relationship with the Federal Government.

Steelman

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · May 29, 2026

Government officials enjoy qualified immunity from suit under § 1983 unless their conduct violates clearly established law. … A right is not clearly established if existing precedent does not place the constitutional question beyond debate.

Burnette v. Perkins & Associates

343 Ark. 237 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 14, 2000

Clearly, attorney’s fees are allowable in a contract action. … Ultimately, Helms received a declaration by the court that his due-process rights had been violated, but received no damages due to a finding of qualified immunity.

Deitsch v. Tillery

309 Ark. 401 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 26, 1992

Four elements are needed to establish liability. … We agree with the trial court that such actions simply do not amount to established policy or custom.

ASA HUTCHINSON, IN His OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS GOVERNOR OF ARKANSAS AND DR. CHARISSE CHILDERS, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS DIRECTOR, ARKANSAS DIVISION OF WORKFORCE SERVICES v. LOGAN ARMSTRONG EMILY BALL RONALD BATES CYNTHIA EYIUCHE And KURT JOHNSEN

2022 Ark. 50 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 10, 2022

Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation (“FPUC”) increased the amount of the weekly benefits received by qualified recipients by $300. 15 U.S.C. § 9023. … Nor do we reach whether sovereign immunity bars this action.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Dec 28, 1999

The term "public body" has been consistently applied in the Code to entities that appear clearly to qualify as "units of government." … Court concluded that the AEA and the ATA were private organizations, rather than agencies of the state, and that any use of tax dollars to fund its members' retirement offended the Arkansas Constitution's privileges and immunities

Wometco Services, Inc. v. Gaddy

272 Ark. 452 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 11, 1981

On appeal Wometco Services raises three constitutional arguments: The laws violate the Commerce Clause, the Equal Protection Clause, and the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the United States Constitution. … We have long regulated dance halls and similar public establishments where juke boxes may lead to unwholesome conditions. Brown v. Cheney, 233 Ark. 920 , 350 S.W. 2d 184 (1961), cert. den. 369 U.S. 796 (1962).

Moises A. Quinteros-Orellana v. Deon T. Clay

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jun 18, 2026

clearly established law. … Because a right is not clearly established unless it is “beyond debate,” a decision “shedding doubt on” a right is often enough to grant qualified immunity.

Nielsen v. Berger-Nielsen

347 Ark. 996 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 14, 2002

Once the moving party has established a prima facie entitlement to summary judgment, the opposing party must meet proof with proof and demonstrate the existence of a material issue of fact. Id. … Code Ann. § 16-22-310 , an attorney-immunity statute.

Prince v. Ark. State Highway Comm'n

576 S.W.3d 1 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 6, 2019

Clearly, citizens are constitutionally permitted to sue the state for an illegal exaction. The question before us in this appeal is whether appellants' complaint states a *4 cause of action for an illegal exaction. … This is not sufficient to establish a claim for an illegal exaction. See Bowerman v. Takeda Pharm.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Apr 18, 2006

MSHS operates in accordance with standards established by the Division and is subject to overall control by the Division. … In enacting A.C.A. § 4-35-105 , the legislature clearly contemplated the possible conversion of an entire private nonprofit corporation into a public rehabilitative services corporation.

Finch Ex Rel. Ebert v. Texarkana School District No. 7

557 F. Supp. 2d 976 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Apr 3, 2008

Precedent from this circuit clearly establishes that compulsory school attendance does not amount to “custody” for the purposes of this exception. Dorothy J. v. Little Rock Sch. Dist., 7 F.3d 729 , 732 (8th Cir.1993). … The parties do not dispute that Arkansas law provides immunity to the School District for this claim.