 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Archer v. State, No. CACR99-42,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, January 26, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Revocation of suspended sentence was upheld because defendant violated good behavior condition by possessing marijuana and drug paraphernalia, but sentence was reduced because it exceeded statutory maximum for class D felony.
|
|||||
| Bevill v. State, No. CACR99-613,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, January 26, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court did not clearly abuse its discretion in allowing a 6-year-old witness to testify or in admitting evidence of appellant's prior sexual misconduct, so the conviction for sexual abuse was affirmed.
|
|||||
| Bezzard v. American Greetings, No. CA99-506,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, January 26, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Workers' compensation claim was properly denied because no objective medical evidence supported diagnosis of impingement syndrome resulting from original compensable fracture.
|
|||||
| Davis v. Old Dominion Freight Line, CA 99-26,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISIONS ONE AND TWO, January 26, 2000, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The correct legal standard to determine whether claimant's action of stepping awkwardly to avoid his niece was an intervening cause disentitling him to additional benefits was whether his action was unreasonable under the circumstances.
|
|||||
| Dugan v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., No. CA99-753,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, January 26, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of claim for workers' compensation benefits was affirmed because it was not error to place greater weight on contemporaneous reports that back pain was not caused by injury over appellant's testimony.
|
|||||
| Harrison v. City of Little Rock, No. CA 99-710,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, January 26, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where appellant failed to offer proof by a preponderance of evidence of entitlement to benefits, the commission's opinion displayed substantial basis for denial of his claim for temporary total disability benefits.
|
|||||
| Hill v. State, No. CACR99-395,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, January 26, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellant's alleged joke months before sexual assault that appellant was going to rape victim went to weight of statement, not admissibility; golden rule error not preserved without request for mistrial or admonition.
|
|||||
| Jordan v. State, No. CACR 98-1525,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, January 26, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The convictions for aggravated robbery and theft of property were affirmed, because identification testimony constituted substantial evidence to support the convictions and was properly allowed into evidence.
|
|||||
| Kearse v. State, No. CACR 99-408,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, January 26, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellant's convictions for second-degree and third-degree battery of police officers, felony fleeing, and resisting arrest were affirmed because the evidence was sufficient with respect to each conviction.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
