 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Adams v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., CA04-689,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, February 2, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Termination of mother's parental rights was affirmed, as the children were first removed due to a sexually abusive environment and then due to environmental neglect, and the mother failed to get a job in over a year so she could support the children.
|
|||||
| Allen v. Int'l Paper Co., CA 04-670,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, February 2, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Workers' compensation commission erred in denying claimant additional compensation benefits when his employer refused to continue his light-duty work and pay after a 90-day period and refused to allow him to return until he could resume his old job.
|
|||||
| Bell v. State, CACR04-582,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, February 2, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The denial of defendant's motions for a directed verdict was proper where the trial court's finding that defendant violated the terms of his probation was proven because he fled from a police officer.
|
|||||
| Cinnamon Valley Resort v. EMAC Enters., CA 03-1112,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, February 2, 2005, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not abuse its discretion in giving instruction regarding breach of warranty and notice in non-Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) case because breach of warranty could also arise in cases that did not involve sale of goods under UCC.
|
|||||
| Cmty. Bank of N. Ark. v. Tri-State Propane, CA 04-645,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, February 2, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court affirmed trial court's ruling in favor of propane company; company detrimentally relied on promise by a bank that the company's bill, owed by one of the bank's borrowers, would be paid upon restructuring of the borrower's loan.
|
|||||
| Cox v. Miller, CA04-76,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, February 2, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court's ruling that ordered individual to convey one-half interest in property to estate was reversed; judicial estoppel precluded the estate from taking a position that was contrary to a position the decedent had taken in a divorce proceeding.
|
|||||
| Culbreath v. ConAgra Poultry Co., CA04-499,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, February 2, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court affirmed a workers' compensation commission's denial of temporary total disability and temporary partial disability benefits, as the employer provided the employee with light duty work that the employee failed to perform.
|
|||||
| Garcia v. A&M Roofing, CA 04-530,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, February 2, 2005, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Contractor was liable for workers' compensation benefits claimant as employee of uninsured subcontractor where contractor subcontracted out roofing job and that subcontractor contracted out job to another roofer who employed claimant.
|
|||||
| Gillam v. Wyrick, CA 04-86,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, February 2, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Only mining company had petitioned to vacate county road in the underlying county court action. County court order vacating road was void for want of jurisdiction, as 10 freeholders did not sign petition. Subsequent circuit court order was also void.
|
|||||
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. |
