Case law

Ark. Dep't of Veterans Affairs v. Mallett

549 S.W.3d 351 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 21, 2018

Thus, because the Arkansas Supreme Court is a 'court' established by the Arkansas Constitution, the State of Arkansas cannot be caused to become a defendant in this court, by this court, or in any other Arkansas court under … Such an interpretation clearly conflicts with other provisions of the constitution which is a fact the majority conveniently chose to ignore in Andrews ." 2018 Ark. 122 , at 5-6, 542 S.W.3d at 843 -44 .

Whorton v. Dixon

363 Ark. 330 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Sep 29, 2005

If a plaintiff’s claim is a legitimate one, he should be able to find somewhere in or out of the State at least one qualified expert witness who will testify for him. … Whorton also cites Article 2, Section 18 of the Arkansas Constitution, Privileges and Immunities, and Article 2, Section 13 of the Arkansas Constitution, Redress ofWrongs.

Vance v. Austell

45 Ark. 400 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 15, 1885

Section 3 of Article XIII., Constitution of 1874., provides that “ No county seat shall be established or changed without the consent of a majority of the qualified voters of the county to be affected by such change, nor … until the place at which it is proposed to establish or change such county seat, shall be fully designated.”

Ward v. Hutchinson

558 S.W.3d 856 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 1, 2018

Because of his death sentence, Ward clearly has a personal stake in the outcome of this case. In 1997, he received his third and final death sentence. … Ward's Arguments On appeal, Ward argues that the circuit court clearly erred in granting the State's motion to dismiss his complaint.

Brown v. Tucker

330 Ark. 435 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 6, 1997

In his motion to dismiss filed below, Appellee raised the issues of sovereign immunity, individual immunity, and the complaint’s failure to state facts upon which relief could be granted as provided in ARCP Rule 12(b)(6). … The words allegedly used by Appellee clearly possess the general tenor of an opinion, as opposed to a verifiable statement of fact.

Wright v. Gibson

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Sep 30, 2022

To determine whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity, the Court considers: (1) whether the facts alleged by plaintiff establish a violation of a constitutional or statutory right, and (2) if so, whether that … right was clearly established at the time of defendant’s alleged misconduct.

Terry v. Payne

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

In Cody, the Eighth Circuit rejected the proposition that it is clearly established in our circuit that “a violation of the Eighth Amendment . . . or of due process . . . can be established based on exposure to excessive … immunity pursuant to the second prong of the governing qualified-immunity test.’

Williams v. Gulick

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Oct 11, 2024

Qualified immunity “shields [a] government official from liability in a section 1983 action unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established right of which a reasonable person would have known.” Brown v. … As the claim did not state a constitutional violation, the Court need not address the second prong of qualified immunity to determine if the law was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.

Boyles v. Clements

302 Ark. 575 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 2, 1990

(b) The tests shall be made by a duly qualified physician or physicians, or by another duly qualified person or persons, not to exceed three (3), to be appointed by the court. … Although we try chancery cases de novo on the record, we do not reverse a finding of fact by the chancellor unless it is clearly erroneous. McGuire v. Bell, supra (citing Milligan v.

Hollonbeck v. Torrey

171 F.R.D. 244 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 17, 1997

must be filed by August 9, 1996, and that “[mjotions to amend pleadings ... shall be filed within 90 days of the issues being joined unless good cause is shown for delay.” ' Finally, any objection to the dates or deadlines established … Being an “owner” can mean possessing a fee interest (clearly inapplicable), being a tenant, lessee, or occupant (also seemingly inapplicable), or being a “person in control of the premises.” ACA 18-11-302.

Raper v. Maxwell

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Dec 1, 2022

“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 known … that right was clearly established at the time of the defendant's alleged misconduct.”

Elam v. Hartford Fire Insurance

344 Ark. 555 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 26, 2001

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. … Hartford argues that it is immune from suit because a workers’ compensation claim is Elam’s exclusive remedy for this work-related injury.

Continental Casualty Company v. Davidson

250 Ark. 35 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 1, 1971

We clearly expressed a preference for an instruction using the word “any” in Avemco. … If the words “any of” had been substituted for “all” in the offered instructions, appellant would have clearly been entitled to have one of them given.

65th Center, Inc. v. Copeland

308 Ark. 456 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 2, 1992

A highway is laid out and established running along the edge of this existing quarry. … Garver & Garver clearly designed and observed the construction of the improvement, and Southeast just as clearly constructed it.

Minchue v. Ivery

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Apr 28, 2025

Qualified Immunity as to Individual Capacity Claim Defendant Ivery asserts qualified immunity on Mr. Minchue’s excessive force claim against him. … Qualified immunity protects government officials from personal liability for damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person [in their

Duncan v. Duncan

383 S.W.3d 833 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Sep 15, 2011

On August 23, 2007, the circuit court entered a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO), which provided as follows: 6. … It is well established that when parties enter voluntarily into an independent property-settlement agreement that is incorporated into a decree of divorce, it cannot subsequently be modified by the court. Gentry v.

Roe v. State

304 Ark. 673 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 4, 1991

(b) The tests shall be made by a duly qualified physician or physicians, or by another duly qualified person or persons, not to exceed three (3), to be appointed by the court. … (c) (2) (A) A written report of the test results by the duly qualified expert performing the test, or by a fully qualified expert under whose supervision and direction the test and analysis have been performed, certified

Massongill v. County of Scott

337 Ark. 281 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 15, 1999

defenses were established. … The majority is clearly wrong. Second, this holding strains logic.

First National Bank of Fayetteville v. Smith

365 F. Supp. 898 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Nov 1, 1973

Since the defendant’s decision is based upon the recommendation and views of the Deputy, it is clearly arbitrary if not capricious. … We are convinced that these orders were clearly wrong and therefore they are unenforceable.”

Boston v. McCormick

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · May 7, 2021

Qualified immunity shields a government official from liability and the burdens of litigation unless the official’s conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right 3 The Court interprets … City of Minneapolis, the Eighth Circuit held that in order for a constitutional right to be clearly established for purposes of overcoming qualified immunity, case law must be established at the time of the alleged violation