Case law

Ramsey v. Department of Human Services

301 Ark. 285 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 5, 1990

The juvenile’s Medicaid eligibility was established effective as of May 1,1987. … The construction of a statute by an administrative agency should not be overturned unless it is clearly wrong, and the court will not substitute its judgment for that of an administrative agency unless the administrative

State v. Buzzard

4 Ark. 18 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 15, 1842

Suppose the constitutional existence of such immunity in favor of the right to keep and bear arms as is urged by the appellee be admitted. By what legal right can a person accused of crime be disarmed ? … The reason for keeping and bearing arms, given in the instrument itself, is clearly explanatory, and furnishes the true interpretation of the claim in question.

Zachary v. Pace

4 Ark. 212 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 15, 1848

If this is the legal import of his answer, then it is clear that he did not make a positive, but a qualified, refusal. … is the very fact upon which the plaintiff relies to establish a conversion.

Beasley v. Parnell

177 Ark. 912 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 9, 1928

If the Senate be not in session when such appointment is made, the appointee shall qualify and hold office until his appointment be rejected by the Senate when it next convenes. … shall he appointed and qualified, and that the other is where a fixed period of time is provided in the statute when the appointment shall be made.

Thomas v. Culclager

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · May 20, 2024

Thomas clearly relinquished any argument that more than reasonable suspicion (or arguable reasonable suspicion for the second prong of qualified immunity) was needed. Accordingly, Ms. … One of the purposes of qualified immunity is to shield government officials from trial (not just liability) where their conduct has not violated clearly established law.27 If, during trial, a judge becomes convinced that

Sterling v. Board of Trustees of University of Arkansas

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Nov 28, 2022

officials from civil liability so long as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights . . . .”91 The Supreme Court has routinely explained that qualified immunity protects “all … Wallace is entitled to qualified immunity. In May of 2018, it was not clearly established that the FMLA prohibited his decision not to hire Ms.

Williams v. Little Rock, City of

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Feb 13, 2023

immunity unless their actions violated clearly established law. … Kansas City Bd. of Police Commissioners, 931 F.3d 672 (8th Cir. 2019), in which the Eighth Circuit found that the SWAT team members were not entitled to qualified immunity because “it was clearly established in 2010 that

Chris Corbett, Esq. v. Arkansas State University Trustees Christy Clark, Price Gardner, Niel Crowson, Jerry Morgan, Steve Eddington, Bishop Robert G. Rudolph, Jr., Paul Rowton, in Their Official Capacities as Trustees of Arkansas State University

2024 Ark. 44 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 4, 2024

There is written notice clearly readable at a distance of more than ten feet at each entrance to FNB Arena, which states “Carrying a Handgun is Prohibited” and “All Weapons are Prohibited.” … Corbitt’s lawsuit because Article 5, section 20 affords the state immunity from suit in most instances, and none of the limited, constitutionally based exceptions were present here. 3 The same is true for this court.

Alexander v. State

575 S.W.3d 401 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 30, 2019

It is far less clear what new claims, if any, Alexander asserts, although ineffective assistance of counsel and diplomatic immunity are referenced. … No hearing in the trial court is required if the proposed petition clearly has no merit because it fails to state a cause of action to support issuance of the writ. See Ramirez v. State , 2018 Ark. 32 , 536 S.W.3d 614 .

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Jun 3, 2011

However, in my opinion, assuming certain qualified voters cast their votes in a polling place *Page 2 outside the district, those votes would clearly be valid and the election would not be void. … particular voter is indeed qualified to vote in a particular election, and I believe the vote of a qualified voter should be counted irrespective of where it was cast in a manner approved by the election commission.

Powell v. Rogers

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jul 22, 2021

Qualified Immunity Defense The standard for religious freedom is clearly established. There are two prongs to a qualified immunity analysis. Jones v. … The next question is whether the right had been clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.

Prater v. St. Paul Ins. Co.

293 Ark. 547 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 23, 1987

Lubin concluded that the perforation must have occurred before Prater was seen at the hospital even though he admits that he was not qualified to determine when the perforation occurred. … to establish rules of practice, pleading, and procedure.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Apr 6, 2006

In my opinion, under Arkansas law, a public school district cannot in effect establish its own law enforcement agency by employing individuals qualified to serve as "law enforcement officers" by having completed the training … Accordingly, even if an individual were qualified to serve as a "law enforcement officer" by virtue of having completed the training program established by the Arkansas Commission on Law Enforcement Standards and Training

Bain v. State

56 Ark. App. 7 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jan 29, 1997

expert or experts to be appointed by the court. (3) (A) A written report of the test results prepared by the duly qualified expert conducting the test, or by a duly qualified expert under whose supervision or direction the … Based on the evidence in the record, we cannot say that the trial court’s finding of paternity was clearly against the preponderance of the evidence.

Davis v. Office of Child Support Enforcement

68 Ark. App. 88 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Nov 17, 1999

It is essentially a safety net program, to protect indigent persons who are otherwise qualified for the program. … If the custodial parent is impoverished then he would qualify for that additional assistance.

Watkins v. Gilliam

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jan 23, 2024

Qualified immunity shields government employees sued in their individual capacities “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of … “To defeat a claim of qualified immunity, a plaintiff . . . must . . . show both that the officer’s conduct violated a constitutional right, and that the constitutional right was clearly established.”

Riemer

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jul 21, 2026

Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity from Plaintiff’s individual- capacity claims. … The qualified immunity inquiry consists of two questions: “(1) whether the facts alleged or shown . . . establish a violation of a constitutional or statutory right, and (2) whether that constitutional right was clearly

Noland v. State

265 Ark. 764 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 21, 1979

In addition to the fact that the terms of the agreement established that the approval of the trial judge was necessary for the dismissal of the charges against the appellant, Ark. Stat. … Clearly a promise of immunity approved by, or with the consent of, the court, should be upheld. *** Thus, it is obvious that Hammers is not controlling in this case.

State of Arkansas; Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration; And Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration, Alcoholic Beverage Control Division v. Good Day Farm Arkansas, LLC; And Capital City Medicinals, LLC

2025 Ark. 207 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Dec 11, 2025

We therefore reverse the circuit court’s ruling declaring the twenty-eight legislative amendments to amendment 98 null and void, as that conclusion rested on a clearly erroneous interpretation of article 5, section 1 and … Therefore, to give section 23(a) coherence and effect, we are compelled to employ established canons of constitutional construction.

LAIDLAW WASTE SYSTEMS v. City of Fort Smith, Ark.

742 F. Supp. 540 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Aug 8, 1990

Instead, the municipality is required to show “a clearly expressed state policy,” id. at 40 , 105 S.Ct. at 1717 , sanctioning anti-competitive conduct. … Defendant interprets L & H to mean that where, as here, a state has established a policy favoring regulation, municipalities are immune from all antitrust liability of any sort regarding the regulated industry.