 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Ark. Game & Fish Comm'n v. Herndon, No. CR 05-356,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, February 2, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although supreme court overruled State v. Bickerstaff, which was controlling law at time of hunting club owner's citation by Arkansas Game and Fish Commission (AGFC), AGFC's writ was denied as circuit court had authority to rule on preemption issue.
|
|||||
| Austin v. Centerpoint Energy Arkla, No. 05-72,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, February 2, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a customer's class action against the public service commission and gas utilities challenging surcharges she paid as a result of an illegal policy implemented by the commission regarding low-income assistance, as the relief the customer was seeking was a refund, the commission had jurisdiction of her claim under Ark. Code Ann. § 23-3-119(d).
|
|||||
| Ayala v. State, No. CR 05-1138,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, February 2, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court reversed a circuit court's dismissal of defendant's appeal of his conviction from the city court as Ark. Code Ann. § 16-96-508 did not apply where defendant only failed to show up to a pre-trial hearing and the dismissal would waive defendant's right to a jury trial which he did not waive.
|
|||||
| Baptist Health v. Murphy, No. 04-430,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, February 2, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in granting preliminary injunction enjoining hospital company from preventing doctors from practicing at its hospitals if they held an interest in a competitor because the credentialing policy violated the Arkansas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, which could satisfy the impropriety requirement for tortious interference claim.
|
|||||
| Bunn v. State, No. CR 05-326,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, February 2, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a felon in possession of a firearm case, rebriefing of defendant's appeal from the denial of his motion for postconviction relief was ordered as he failed to provide an abstract that included all material parts of the testimony necessary to an understanding of all questions presented for appeal, as required by Ark. Sup. Ct. & Ct. App. R. 4-2.
|
|||||
| Burnett v. State, No. CR 85-44,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, February 2, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's petition for writ of error coram nobis on grounds that she was entitled to proceed in the trial court based upon the legislature's modification of the definition of first degree murder under Ark. Code Ann. § 5-10-102 since her conviction was denied as her petition did not raise a cognizable basis for granting the extraordinary remedy.
|
|||||
| Cluck v. State, No. CR05-677,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, February 2, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in reversing defendant's conviction where evidence sufficiently showed that he was guilty of possession of paraphernalia with the intent to manufacture methamphetamine, and prior crime evidence was properly admitted as an exception under Ark. R. Evid. 404(b) to show knowledge and intent.
|
|||||
| El-Farra v. Sayyed, No. 05-419,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, February 2, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Circuit court did not have subject matter jurisdiction under First Amendment to review Islamic minister's complaints against Islamic center and its executive committee members where determination of claims would involve ecclesiastical issues, and court would not involve itself in center's right to choose ministers without government interference.
|
|||||
| Haak v. State, No. CACR 03-1247,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, February 2, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the indigent petitioner failed to allege that there was any specific documentary evidence in the transcript to support a postconviction claim, he failed to show that he was entitled to have the transcript provided to him at no cost.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
