Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
4,882 results
0.52s
Matlock v. Arkansas Department of Human Services
458 S.W.3d 253 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Mar 11, 2015
However, she again explained that she wanted D.W. to be able to stay in his current placement “until we get established for him to be with his aunt. I want him with his family. … She explained that it was DHS’s policy to consider qualified family members as adoptive parents along with other qualified families.
Cited 8 timesPublishedDistrict Court, W.D. Arkansas · Feb 9, 2026
clearly established at the time of the incident. … If it was clearly established in 2020 that an officer must provide adequate warning before using a K9, it must have also been clearly established two years later when Officer Jacobs let his dog loose on Mr.
Cited 0 timesUnknownArkansas State Racing Commission v. Sayler
249 Ark. 913 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 1, 1971
It clearly found, on the evidence before it, that Jockey Vernon Sayler had a shocking device in his possession with intention to use it in the race. … This added provision is the only part of the commission’s order that is any way qualified or conditional. The commission has a difficult task and a heavy responsibility to the patrons of racing establishments.
Cited 0 timesPublished235 Ark. 497 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 8, 1962
Since the Cartrights were clearly entitled to vote in Pulaski county it follows that they were no longer eligible to cast their ballots in Greene county. … Robinson, J., thinks that the Cartrights were qualified to vote in Greene county. McFaddin, J., dissents.
Cited 6 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. Arkansas · Sep 11, 2024
But, beyond these vagaries, Defendants do not develop an argument with respect to the clearly-established prong of the qualified-immunity analysis. … The absence of an argument concerning the clearly-established prong of the qualified-immunity test does not appear to have been an oversight.
Cited 0 timesUnknown374 Ark. 532 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 3, 2008
Section 3-8-204 of the Local Option Code establishes rules on petition procedure and section 3-8-204(e) provides: Any person who is a qualified elector of the State of Arkansas and who is a resident and registered voter of … Section 9(c)(1) of amendment 51 clearly indicates that a qualified applicant is not registered until the permanent registrar “receives” and “acknowledges” a “legible and complete voter registration application.” Ark.
Cited 11 timesPublished69 Ark. 451 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 29, 1901
principles to the facts, if it could be said that appellant, so long as he lived with appellees and kept them as a part of his family, stood to them in loco parentis, this certainly was not the case after he left them and established … The purpose not to be so treated was as clearly manifested by the appellees in the institution of this suit for the use and occupation of the premises.
Cited 4 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. Arkansas · Aug 28, 2020
Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity protects officials who acted in an objectively reasonable manner and shields a government official from liability when his or her conduct … does not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, W.D. Arkansas · Oct 1, 2024
Qualified Immunity Defendants assert qualified immunity as to each of Plaintiff’s claims. … It is also clearly established in the Eighth Circuit that surprise attacks by fellow inmates do not rise to the level of a constitutional violation. See Vandevender v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownArkansas Attorney General Reports · Mar 1, 2007
As your request suggests, the question just posed clearly implicates the provisions of Amendment 33, which provides in pertinent part: § 2. Abolition or transfer of powers of board or commission — Restrictions. … To be sure, various statutes invest in an institution's board the authority to establish tuition policy.
Cited 0 timesPublished2022 Ark. App. 469 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Nov 16, 2022
On August 17, the circuit court continued the appointment of Rushton as the temporary guardian of Linda’s person for ninety days from entry of that order; gave Rushton the authority to employ caregivers for Linda; and established … This standard of review accords greater deference to the circuit court than the clearly erroneous standard.
Cited 1 timesPublishedRineco Chemical Industries, Inc. v. Weiss
344 Ark. 118 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 8, 2001
in manufacturing articles of commerce and, therefore, qualify for an exemption under state law. … Rineco has broken down the statutory definition into five factors that must be established to qualify for the manufacturing exemption.
Cited 6 timesPublished2026 Ark. 95 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 7, 2026
Declaratory relief may be granted if it has been established that (1) there is a justiciable controversy; (2) the controversy is between persons whose interests are adverse; (3) the party seeking relief has a legal interest … But Walker’s petition should first be dismissed because sovereign immunity bars his one and only claim: a declaratory-judgment action against state actors.1 To the extent Walker brought any federal claims within his petition
Cited 0 timesPublished2022 Ark. App. 469 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Nov 16, 2022
On August 17, the circuit court continued the appointment of Rushton as the temporary guardian of Linda’s person for ninety days from entry of that order; gave Rushton the authority to employ caregivers for Linda; and established … This standard of review accords greater deference to the circuit court than the clearly erroneous standard.
Cited 1 timesPublishedCourtney Holmes v. Arkansas Department of Human Services
505 S.W.3d 730 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Oct 26, 2016
App. 495 standard of review is whether findings of fact were clearly erroneous); Merriman v. … Yutterman, 291 Ark. 207, 723 S.W.2d 823 (1987) (right to reform deed must be established beyond a reasonable doubt, and standard of review is whether trial court’s decision was clearly erroneous); Robinson v.
Cited 13 timesPublishedArkansas Attorney General Reports · Mar 28, 2000
That is, the Program clearly has a secular purpose. … As indicated, this issue can only be determined by a qualified finder of fact.
Cited 0 timesPublishedArkansas Attorney General Reports · Sep 26, 2006
Att'y Gen. 87-340 (stating that "amendment [32] establishes a ceiling of one mill as the maximum rate that may be levied on taxable real and personal property to this end"). … In addition, in my opinion, the clearly applicable provisions of Section 3, with its one-mill limitation, may not be skirted by an attempted levy of an "additional" one mill under a duplicate application of the provisions
Cited 0 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. Arkansas · Oct 26, 2022
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 their positions … , was that right clearly established at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct.
Cited 0 timesUnknown226 Ark. 581 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jun 18, 1956
It is contended that this section confers immunity against subsequent prosecution and effectively destroys any possibility that the witness’s forced admissions may ever prove to be incriminating. … Here the proof falls a good deal short of establishing a prior conviction. There is admittedly no written record of such a conviction by any court. The State attempted to prove by the county judge, C. 0.
Cited 2 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. Arkansas · Sep 3, 2025
Andrews, 972 F.3d 1007, 1012 (8th Cir. 2020) (“We do not ‘define clearly established law at a high level of generality. . . . … qualified immunity. In the Motion to Dismiss, the three moving Defendants raised a prong-two qualified immunity argument.12 The PRD did not address this argument at all.13 The Court must.
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna