Case law

Ingle v. Arkansas Department of Human Services

449 S.W.3d 283 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Nov 13, 2014

The circuit court had clearly erred in closing the case in contravention of the dictates of the juvenile code. … Clearly, we did not direct the circuit court to close the dependency neglect proceedings.

Ward v. Runion

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 19, 2024

Courts must be careful not to define clearly established law at a high level of generality. Id. … Even though the law concerning a prisoner’s right to receive information and ideas is clearly established, the officials may still be entitled to qualified immunity if they reasonably could have believed that their conduct

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Dec 30, 1994

It should be initially noted that a classification for psychological test technician was not provided in Act 129 of 1955, which established the Arkansas Board of Examiners in Psychology and its powers and duties. … Clearly, the Arkansas Board of Examiners in Psychology is vested with administrative authority under these Code provisions governing psychological practice as "psychologists" and "psychological examiners."

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Aug 11, 2000

RESPONSE In my opinion, the revenues described in your first question clearly qualify as "public funds." … Under these circumstances, I believe the retained funds are clearly "public" in character. 1 Moreover, given its character and functions, a library board is properly characterized as an agency of the county, 2 which qualifies

Forsgren v. Gillioz

110 F. Supp. 647 · District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Mar 2, 1953

As a part of said contract plaintiffs agreed as subcontractors to do in their entirety certain items of work covered by defendant’s general contract at the unit prices established in said contract; and it was further agreed … The discrimination would arise as follows: Section 1 of Act 347 clearly does not ap< ply to contract actions.

Dodd v. Sparks Regional Medical Center

90 Ark. App. 191 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Mar 2, 2005

Appellees responded that the witnesses appellant offered did not qualify as experts, that there was no testimony setting forth the applicable standard of care, and that appellant had failed to establish that the failure to … Clearly, such claims fall within the purview of the Medical Malpractice Act. Dodson v. Charter Behavioral Health System, Inc., supra; Spring Creek Living Center v. Sarrett, 319 Ark. 259 , 890 S.W.2d 598 (1995).

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · May 1, 2006

Nos. 2006-005 , 2002-345, 2001-363, and 2000-187 (applying the Interlocal Cooperation Act to various entities that appear clearly to qualify as units of government). … Because the Agreement does not establish a separate legal entity to conduct the cooperative undertaking, it must also provide for an administrator or a joint board. A.C.A. § 25-20-104 (d)(1).

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · Jul 8, 2008

With regard, first, to the non-qualified members, i.e., those who will not have met the eligibility requirements prior to the elimination of DROP, it seems unlikely that such persons could establish a present property interest … Unless the legislation eliminating DROP were found to require the forfeiture of benefits for which the non-qualified members legally contracted, it clearly will not have the effect of violating the constitutional prohibition

Brown v. Holladay

918 F. Supp. 2d 809 · District Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jan 14, 2013

Because the Court grants summary judgment to defendants on these claims, it need not examine the issue of qualified immunity under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . IV. … For these reasons, defendants’ motion for summary judgment is granted, and defendants’ request for qualified immunity is denied as moot (Dkt. No. 11). Ms.

Ward v. Runion

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

Even so, such “[i]ndividual defendants are entitled to qualified immunity unless their alleged conduct violated ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person [in his position … right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation.

Spencer v. Payne

District Court, E.D. Arkansas · May 27, 2025

Qualified immunity protects government officials from suits for damages under § 1983 “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person [in their … right; and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation.”

Carmichael v. Saint

16 Ark. 28 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 15, 1855

This being the case, it is clearly prima faaie evidence of the plaintiff’s right to sue; and, as such, fully sufficient, unless successfully attacked and avoided by legitimate matter of defence introduced by the defendant … "We entertain no doubt of the sufficiency of the proof to establish the plaintiff’s right to sue, and that consequently the court below erred in ruling’ otherwise.

Jackson v. Cadillac Cowboy, Inc.

337 Ark. 24 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Mar 18, 1999

Ann. § 9:2800.1 (West 1997) immunizes alcoholic beverage vendors who serve alcohol to persons who are legally of age. … Clearly, the question of who is intoxicated becomes illusive.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · May 30, 2001

Given that you are a coach at a public high school, and as such a public employee, I believe your files clearly qualify as "public records" under this definition. As I noted most recently in Ark. Op. Att'y Gen. … In my opinion, these documents qualify as "employee evaluation or job performance records."

Home Care Professionals of Arkansas, Inc. v. Williams

95 Ark. App. 194 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · May 10, 2006

Upon remand, the Board found that the remunerations qualified as wages. From that decision HCP now brings this appeal. … HCP specifically argues that the remuneration received by the caregivers does not constitute wages for the purpose of establishing unemployment insurance liability.

Opinion No.

Arkansas Attorney General Reports · May 12, 1986

It follows that the burden is upon the general contractor to establish the reasonableness of his method of soliciting bids and that no licensed contractors responded. … It appears that the legislature intended that a licensed specialty contractor be required if available through reasonable solicitation but did not clearly address the use of unlicensed specialty contractors in such contracts

United States Fidelty & Guaranty Co. v. Smith

252 Ark. 556 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · May 15, 1972

The plaintiff’s proof having established a prima facie case, the insurer then has the burden of showing that the loss falls within the exemption contained in the policy, that being an affirmative defense. … Here the witness Tucker, upon being closely questioned with respect to his qualifications, was unable to cite any training or experience that clearly qualified him as an expert with respect to the question at issue.

Basham v. Conkleton

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Feb 23, 2021

In the instant motion, Defendant argues that he is entitled to summary judgment because he is entitled to qualified immunity. … Determining whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity requires a two-step inquiry. Jones v. McNeese, 675 F.3d 1158, 1161 (8th Cir. 2012).

Maxwell v. State

259 Ark. 86 · Supreme Court of Arkansas · Jan 19, 1976

The names called to be qualified as jurors in the case were apparently drawn at random from this list and the jury chosen from 148 names so drawn. … It was established on cross-examination that she saw no one other than this employee near the scene before the officers arrived.

Shipp v. Hoffman

District Court, W.D. Arkansas · Jul 15, 2020

The affirmative defense of qualified immunity shields government officials from liability unless their conduct violates clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … Clearly Established Right The second prong of the qualified immunity analysis is whether Plaintiff’s implicated right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation.