Case law

In re Admin. Order No. 15.1

2016 Ark. 131 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 17, 2016

An attorney ad litem, functioning as an arm of the court, is afforded immunity against ordinary negligence for actions taken in furtherance of his or her appointment. l. … An attorney ad litem, functioning as an arm of the court, is afforded immunity against ordinary negligence for actions taken in furtherance of his or her appointment. l.

Harris v. Beth

518 S.W.3d 126 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Mar 29, 2017

Harris responded by denying the allegations in their entirety and by affirmatively pleading qualified immunity. … We affirm the circuit court’s decision because Harris failed to establish a prima facie entitlement to summary judgment.

Fields v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance

350 Ark. 75 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Sep 19, 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. … Finally, the fact that criminal laws provide penalties for child abuse seems largely irrelevant as a justification for the doctrine, since Arkansas has already qualified the parental-immunity rule and excepted intentional

Doe v. Baum

348 Ark. 259 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 18, 2002

Moreover, the language included in the Program document itself does not waive the immunity afforded to either Baum or FLSD by the immunity statute; rather, that language expressly preserves immunity under the Program. … Code Ann. § 6-19-105 and clearly intended Ark. Code Ann. § 21-9-301 as a substitute. Ark.

Archer v. SISTERS OF MERCY HEALTH SYSTEM

294 S.W.3d 414 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 12, 2009

Am., 364 Ark. 427, 440 , 220 S.W.3d 670, 680 (2005) (certain charitable entities are immune from tort liability). … It is difficult under these facts to accept the proposition that the Liability Pool qualifies as a new party, brought into this matter and burdened with a new obligation imposed by virtue of Act 750.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Oct 28, 1999

Because the drafters of this legislation obviously were aware that the described emergency care or treatment could be rendered by persons who receive compensation from some other source, they clearly did not intend for the … See, e.g., Citizens to Establish a Reform Party v. Priest, 325 Ark. 257 , 926 S.W.2d 432 (1996); Henson v. Fleet Mtg. Co., 319 Ark. 491 , 892 S.W.2d 250 (1995).

Freeman v. Rushton

360 Ark. 445 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 27, 2005

. § 28-65-204 (a) and in our long-established caselaw. … The natural-parent preference referred to by appellant derives both from our long-established caselaw in custody matters and from Ark. Code Ann. § 28-65-204 (a).

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Dec 13, 1996

The reason for this disinclination is that although it is undisputed that some patients have adverse reactions to particular vaccines, it is also well-established that most patients will not have an adverse reaction to all … Clearly, the Department can more effectively uphold its public health duty by issuing narrowly-tailored exemptions, rather than very general ones that would preclude even non-harmful immunizations.

Croston

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Apr 9, 2026

Qualified immunity protects government officials from § 1983 liability for damages if their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity if: (1) the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to Plaintiff, does not establish a violation of a constitutional right; or (2) the constitutional right was not clearly

Arkansas Highway & Transportation Department v. Hope Brick Works, Inc.

294 Ark. 490 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 16, 1988

the release of the Highway Department’s appraisals to Hope Brick Works, Inc., will give a department’s competitor an unfair advantage; and (7) the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act is in violation of the privileges and immunities … Prior to the condemnation suit being filed, the appellee requested copies of all opinions of qualified real estate appraisers that formed the basis for the Highway Department’s offer to purchase the appellee’s land.

Roberts v. State

488 S.W.3d 524 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 17, 2016

Roberts also argues that this court should establish a mandatory post-conviction proceeding and review for death-penalty defendants who waive their postconviction rights. … And whether one or the other amount to .what I guess a preponderance of evidence was a call that I just didn’t feel qualified or competent enough to make at that time. On cross-examination, Dr.

JOHN THURSTON, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE STATE OF ARKANSAS SHARON BROOKS, BILENDA HARRIS-RITTER, WILLIAM LUTHER, CHARLES ROBERTS, JAMES SHARP, AND J. HARMON SMITH, IN THEIR OFFICIAL CAPACITIES AS MEMBERS OF THE ARKANSAS STATE BOARD OF ELECTION COMMISSIONERS v. THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF ARKANSAS ARKANSAS UNITED DORTHA DUNLAP LEON KAPLAN NELL MATTHEWS MOCK JEFFERY RUST AND PATSY WATKINs

2024 Ark. 90 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 16, 2024

voters can vote in accordance with rules and processes established by the legislature. … Amendment 51’s stated purpose is to “establish a system of permanent personal registration as a means of determining that all who cast ballots in elections are legally qualified to vote in such elections.

Harris v. Payne

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

Third, they argue they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Qualified Immunity Defendants’ final argument is that they are entitled to qualified immunity.

Bates v. City of Little Rock

229 Ark. 819 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 22, 1958

If NAACP wants tax immunity, it should comply with the ordinance. It cannot have immunity from taxation without complying with the ordinance. … The three-Judge Court, in an opinion by Circuit Judge Rives, held that the Alabama School Placement Law furnished legal machinery for an orderly administration of the public schools by admission of qualified pupils upon a

Brown v. Gammage

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 24, 2022

Qualified immunity shields police officers from lawsuits based on official conduct if reasonable officers in the same position could have believed their conduct was “lawful, in light of clearly established law and the … To overcome qualified immunity, Plaintiff must allege (1) a violation of his statutory or constitutional rights, and (2) that “the right at issue was ‘clearly established’ at the time of [the] defendant’s alleged misconduct

Woods

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 9, 2026

Qualified Immunity Defendants ask the Court to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims against them in their individual capacities based on qualified immunity. … 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.

JOHN THURSTON, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE STATE OF ARKANSAS SHARON BROOKS, BILENDA HARRIS-RITTER, WILLIAM LUTHER, CHARLES ROBERTS, JAMES SHARP, AND J. HARMON SMITH, IN THEIR OFFICIAL CAPACITIES AS MEMBERS OF THE ARKANSAS STATE BOARD OF ELECTION COMMISSIONERS v. THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF ARKANSAS ARKANSAS UNITED DORTHA DUNLAP LEON KAPLAN NELL MATTHEWS MOCK JEFFERY RUST AND PATSY WATKINs

2024 Ark. 90 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 16, 2024

voters can vote in accordance with rules and processes established by the legislature. … Amendment 51’s stated purpose is to “establish a system of permanent personal registration as a means of determining that all who cast ballots in elections are legally qualified to vote in such elections.

Gentry v. Sieger

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

Qualified immunity “shields [a] government official[] from liability in a § 1983 action unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person … Without a constitutional violation, Defendant Rogers is entitled to qualified immunity under the first prong of the qualified immunity analysis, and the Court need not determine whether the particular right is clearly

Ferrell

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jul 24, 2026

Qualified immunity “shields government officials from liability in a § 1983 action unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would have … “Toward this end, police officers have qualified immunity from liability in their individual capacity unless they violate a clearly established right of which a reasonable person would know.” Id.

Ferrell

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jun 10, 2026

Qualified immunity shields officers from suits against them in their individual capacities when their conduct does not violate a clearly-established constitutional right. Kelsay v. … Even if Pigue’s reliance on the warrant was unreasonable, qualified immunity still applies because Ferrell does not point to any clearly established law that would have put Pigue on notice that the warrant displayed on his