 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Franklin v. State, CACR05-590,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, February 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant did not preserve his argument that the trial court erred in instructing the jury on the definition of "delivery" because the trial judge gave the precise clarification that defendant asked for and defendant never proffered any other specific language for the trial court to use other than the language of the jury instruction.
|
|||||
| Harris v. Altheimer Unified Sch. Dist., CA05-646,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, February 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the substitute teacher did not meet the definition of "teacher" under the Teacher Fair Dismissal Act, Ark. Code Ann. § 6-17-1501 et seq., and because he did not occupy a position that required a teaching license, he was not entitled to written notice of the nonrenewal of a teaching contract or a hearing on the matter.
|
|||||
| Henson v. State, CACR 05-679,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, February 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction for theft by receiving, in violation of Ark. Code Ann. § 5-36-106, was upheld where evidence established that his companion was in store where victim worked around time that her credit card was stolen, defendant presented credit card at a gas station short time later, and defendant and his companion tried to buy merchandise.
|
|||||
| Hooten v. Jensen, CA05-742,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, February 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Order denying son injunction prohibiting his deceased father's wife from receiving father's pension benefits was upheld where testimony from one of father's physicians, justice of peace who married the father and the wife, and a bank employee supported finding that father was competent at time of transaction even though he had suffered two strokes.
|
|||||
| Hyatt v. State, CACR 05-576,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, February 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant's felony first degree murder convictions under Ark. Code Ann. § 5-10-102 were supported by his unchallenged felony fleeing, it was immaterial whether or not the State also proved that a stolen car defendant was driving had a value of $ 500 because felony first degree murder required proof of only one felony.
|
|||||
| Isaac v. Twin Lakes Nursing & Rehab Ctr. , CA05-654,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, February 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A finding against the employee in her workers' compensation action was proper pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-508(a) where there was no medical evidence to support her claim that the injury sustained to the employee's right arm was work related. Thus, the employee failed to meet her burden of proof.
|
|||||
| Leslie v. Leslie, CA 05-627,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, February 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in calculating a father's income for purpose of child support by disallowing depreciation expenses where, when considering father's farm loss deductions, trial court noted that his primary occupation was a medical doctor; depreciation did not affect the expendable income that he had available from which to pay child support.
|
|||||
| Maddox v. State, CACR05-572,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, February 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress drug paraphernalia where officer asked if defendant minded if he looked for open containers in defendant's vehicle, and defendant said, "Sure, go ahead." That constituted valid consent, pursuant to Ark. R. Crim. P. 11.1, and even if search were pretextual, consent validated search.
|
|||||
| McDonald v. State, CACR 05-481,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, February 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a kidnapping case, the court of appeals found that it was defendant's responsibility to raise the assignments of error he raised on appeal to the trial court, Ark. R. Crim. P. 33.1, and because he failed to do so, his arguments were not preserved for review; accordingly, the court of appeals affirmed without reaching the merits.
|
|||||
| O'Hara v. J. Christy Constr. Co., CA 05-478,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISIONS ONE, TWO AND THREE, February 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Workers' compensation commission erred in holding claim for additional wage-loss disability benefits or permanent and total disability, above March 1997 award of 20% wage-loss disability, was barred by res judicata; more recent claim was based on post-1997 changes in condition, and Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-713(e) did not require objective findings.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
