Case law

Mosier v. Robinson

722 F. Supp. 555 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Sep 18, 1989

The principle that a local government cannot be held liable under § 1983 on a respondeat superior theory was established in Monell v. … Michigan Department of State Police, supra, the Court does not believe that the county shares the state’s immunity under § 1983.

State v. 26 Gaming MacHines

356 Ark. 47 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Feb 5, 2004

Sertell, however, denied that nudity was the type of reward that qualified as an element of gambling. … Moreover, this court has never held that an intangible reward, such as viewing nudity, qualifies as a reward for gambling purposes.

Rikard v. State

354 Ark. 345 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 9, 2003

We ultimately concluded that the wildlife officer’s conduct did not violate the appellants’ constitutional rights; thus, he was entitled to qualified immunity from appellants’ civil-rights claims. … Thornton, J., not participating. 1 This court did so as part of its inquiry into whether the wildlife officer was entitled to qualified immunity.

Minor L. McNeil v. Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration; Robert Pugh, Manager; And Wade Gambill, Auditor

2021 Ark. App. 408 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Oct 27, 2021

Facts and Procedural History A long-standing disagreement has been established during multiple previous lawsuits between McNeil and DFA regarding what the Arkansas Constitution defines … as the reserved immunities of its people; what Arkansas taxing statutes clearly state—as passed by the legislature; and how those laws vary from the way in which DFA interprets and administers its tax programs.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · May 2, 2003

policies and standards for the public defender system throughout the state, including standards for determining who qualifies as an indigent person; (2) To establish policies and standards for the organization and operation … Moreover, the courts will uphold the Commission's determination regarding this matter, unless it is clearly wrong.

Brown v. Frenken

87 Ark. 160 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 13, 1908

Brown, who states to the court that he is the regularly qualified and appointed trustee in bankruptcy of the estate of George W. Harden and A. M. … It is clearly established by the authorities supra that a party aggrieved by a judgment has a right of appeal, though he is not a party to the record.

Bales v. City of Fort Smith

505 S.W.3d 705 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Oct 19, 2016

Appellees have established prima facie entitlement to summary judgment. … Sampson also alleges that his communications regarding improper overtime usage qualify him as a whistle-blower under the AWBA.

Dixon v. Roberts

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jul 24, 2025

“Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability in their individual capacity so long as the official has not violated ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation.’”

Buelow v. Madlock

90 Ark. App. 466 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Apr 13, 2005

It was his opinion that the building would not have qualified for special coverage due to the nature of the building and its condition, but he admitted that he did not check to make sure that it would not qualify. … Examples include express agreement, long established relationships of entrustment in which the agent clearly appreciates the duty of giving advice, additional compensation apart from premium payments, and the agent holding

Gordon v. State

539 S.W.3d 586 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 8, 2018

Fact Qualifying During Closing Argument Demonstrating Hostility Toward the Defendant For his fifth point on appeal, Gordon contends that his trial counsel was ineffective by fact qualifying during closing arguments, demonstrating … While Gordon's arguments on appeal are similar to the arguments made in the petition, Gordon has clearly changed the scope of his arguments, including both his claims for "fact qualifying" and hostility, from making the claims

State, Department of Career Education, Division of Rehabilitation Services v. Means

426 S.W.3d 922 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 25, 2013

According to Means, once John Doe completed his training, he was no longer qualified for services at the center. … Then subsection (2)(A)(ii) follows and lists persons who qualify as an “appropriate authority.”

Cross

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Dec 31, 2025

The court’s qualified immunity analysis considers two questions: “(1) whether the facts shown by the plaintiff make out a violation of a constitutional . . . right, and (2) whether that right was clearly … established at that time and Defendant Nutt is nevertheless entitled to qualified immunity with respect to this claim.

Terry v. White

374 Ark. 366 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Oct 2, 2008

At that time, counsel for White and Sugg indicated an intent to file a motion to dismiss on the grounds of sovereign immunity. … He argues that comments made at the hearing establish the lack of clarity of the discovery ruling.

Taylor v. Kerstein

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jan 12, 2024

clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … And, even if there was sufficient evidence, I find Defendants are also entitled to qualified immunity under the second prong because the law was not clearly established that a reduction of out-of-cell exercise for the duration

Fugett v. State

208 Ark. 979 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jul 2, 1945

This ownership is recognized and established both by the title and the provisions of the act. … Courts are not authorized to strike down a law enacted by the General Assembly unless it clearly appears that the law contravenes some provision of the constitution; and, in case of’doubt as to the constitutionality of a

Neal v. Arkansas, State of

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jun 8, 2021

Qualified Immunity Defendants contend they are entitled to qualified immunity on Plaintiff’s personal capacity claims against them. (Doc. No. 59 at 23.) … Qualified immunity protects government officials who acted in an objectively reasonable manner and shields an official from liability when his or her conduct does not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional

Tanner v. Ziegenhorn

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Sep 22, 2020

Trooper Ziegenhorn seeks qualified immunity here. … The Court therefore denies Ziegenhorn qualified immunity on this claim without prejudice.

Hales v. Wakefield

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Oct 25, 2023

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 constitutional violation; or (2) the constitutional right was not clearly established

Kirklin v. Benton

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Aug 17, 2020

the violation of a clearly established constitutional right. … Qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have

Dunkin v. Citizens Bank of Jonesboro

291 Ark. 588 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Apr 6, 1987

The courts, therefore, have insisted that the privilege be validly taken, asserted in a timely manner, and limited to information that clearly falls within its ambit.” Id. … The New York court explained: Thus, a claimant of the privilege is not immunized from answering a question upon his mere declaration that it would tend to incriminate him — “his say-so does not of itself establish the hazard