Case law

Cook, Commissioner of Revenues v. Wilson

208 Ark. 459 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 2, 1945

The federal statutes show that national forests are established in two ways: (a) by presidential proclamation declaring certain lands of the public domain to be a national forest. … Executive construction of a statute is entitled to consideration by the courts, and should not be disregarded except for cogent reasons, or unless clearly erroneous. 59 C. J. 1027; 25 R. C. L. 1045; 42 Am.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Oct 22, 2003

If, in effect, the act establishes such a presumption, I believe this must be clearly conveyed to the voter. … The amount is established under this section as "six marijuana plants and one ounce of usable marijuana for each qualifying patient."

Frye v. Watson

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Sep 15, 2025

“In a § 1983 action, an officer is entitled to qualified immunity unless: (1) the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right, and (2) that right was clearly established.” Ching ex rel. Jordan v. … They argue that it is clearly established that “probable cause is required for an arrest.” ECF No. 44, p. 10. However, the Fryes have not shown that the alleged constitutional violation was clearly established.

Trimble v. State

316 Ark. 161 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 28, 1994

The jury clearly was not bound by Trimble’s version of the murder itself and based on the evidence presented could have concluded that Trimble was lying when he said he was not involved in the murder. See Heard v. … The burden of proof in establishing jury misconduct is on the moving party. Id.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Jun 19, 1997

Code Ann. 6-17-1113 to authorize and direct ADE to establish a self-insurance fund or procure insurance policies to insure school district employees against acts or omissions from which they have not traditionally been immune … This coverage clearly is not equivalent to motor vehicle insurance coverage in the traditional sense. Rather, it is limited to coverage for the purpose set forth in A.C.A. § 6-17-1113 and described by the court.

Hale v. State

343 Ark. 62 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 7, 2000

However, neither case establishes an exception to our contemporaneous-objection rule. … Finally, he contends that the State failed to follow the procedure established by Ark. Code Ann. § 16-44-201 .

Kelsey v. Cobbs

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 4, 2025

Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person [in … , was that right clearly established at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct.

Dollar v. Adams

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Oct 7, 2025

A government official is entitled to qualified immunity in a § 1983 case “unless the official's conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Adams has not established that he is entitled to qualified immunity or summary judgment on these claims.

Misty Clark v. Arkansas Department of Human Services and Minor Children

625 S.W.3d 362 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Apr 28, 2021

The law-of-the-case doctrine holds that a decision of an appellate court establishes the law of the case for a circuit court upon remand and for the appellate court itself upon further review. Farrell v. … Clark also argues that the State failed to prove that the Sargents are qualified to act as guardians. According to Ark.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Jun 9, 2008

I also note with regard to this 2004 opinion, however, that my predecessor qualified the sanctioning of such an agreement by observing that Arkansas law did not specifically authorize Texas law enforcement officers to make … If an Arkansas municipality so authorizes an officer, the officer has "the same powers, duties, and immunities as a certified law enforcement officer of Arkansas who is acting in the discharge of an official duty."

Hanley v. Arkansas State Claims Commission

333 Ark. 159 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 7, 1998

Code Ann. § 16-115-101 (1987), is appropriate if the following two factors are established. … We agree with the trial court that DHS has failed to establish both of these factors. In Fireman’s Insurance Co. v.

Smith v. Thomas

100 Ark. App. 195 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Oct 31, 2007

In the first place, Devine involved the initial preference in establishing a guardianship, not the termination of a guardianship of substantial duration as in the case at bar. … Secondly, although the trial court pronounced Smith “qualified” to parent his child, at the same time it expressed reservations about his credibility.

Burkett v. PPG Industries, Inc.

294 Ark. 50 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 7, 1987

However, we affirm the trial court’s holding that the insurance companies are immune from suit, due to our workers’ compensation laws which identify the insurers with the employer who clearly is immune. 1. … That subsection establishes a formula by which the proceeds of any recovery from the “third party” are distributed.

Erika Lara, Katie Parrish, and Nikita Glendenning v. Gwen Faulkenberry, Special Renee Sanders, Anika Whitfield, and Kimberly Crutchfield

2025 Ark. 205 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 11, 2025

We hold that the Appellants have established a recognized interest in the lawsuit. C. … Faulkenberry, 2025 Ark. ___, implicates sovereign immunity, I must dissent from the result reached by the majority.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Sep 22, 2010

This may be a closer question, given that board members are elected by community college "districts" established pursuant to Ark. … College ., 76 F.3d 1437 (8th Cir. 1996) (finding community college to be an arm of the state entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity); Ark. Op. Att'y Gen.

Coonrod v. Seay

367 Ark. 437 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 12, 2006

representative on account of injury or death arising out of and in the course of her employment is a claim for compensation under § 11-9-105, and that the commission has exclusive, original jurisdiction to determine the facts that establish … Finally, the circuit court clearly encroached on the exclusive jurisdiction of the Workers’ Compensation Commission when it made the preliminary determination that Coonrod was not Seay’s employer and thus not immune under

McCutcheon v. Parker

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 11, 2025

OBJECTION THREE: ENTITLEMENT TO QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Defendants’ next objection is to the denial of qualified immunity. … McCutcheon’s clearly established constitutional rights. First, it is undisputed that Mr.

THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS v. MATTHEW ANDREWS

535 S.W.3d 616 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 18, 2018

However, because of the manner in which the majority has interpreted article 5, the holding clearly violates the above-cited article 2 provisions. … Instead, the majority’s decision, in a perfunctory fashion, overhauls over twenty years of our well-established law on sovereign immunity and has effectively revived the antiquated doctrine that “the king can do no wrong.

Harris v. Payne

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

to qualified immunity. … Because the Court finds that the right is not clearly established, it must find that Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.

Hight v. Williams

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Aug 27, 2024

Qualified Immunity In his summary judgment motion, Defendant Williams argues that he is entitled to summary judgment based on the application of qualified immunity … “In a § 1983 action, an officer is entitled to qualified immunity unless: (1) the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right, and (2) that right was clearly established.” Ching ex rel. Jordan v.