 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Heath v. Heath, No. CA 99-679,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, February 9, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Jurisdiction over children did not exist because Arkansas was not home state of children without significant connection to state, children were not neglected or dependent, and another proper state had not declined jurisdiction.
|
|||||
| In re Estate of Lukas, No. CA99-767,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, February 9, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Probate court's final estate distribution affirmed. Settlement agreement made no reference to payment of estate's attorney' fees. Parole evidence rule prohibited testimony intended to contradict settlement agreement.
|
|||||
| Leftwich v. Director, Arkansas Employment Security Dep't, No. E 99-80,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, February 9, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Decision of board, denying unemployment benefits, was reversed where it was not supported by sufficient evidence that appellant was discharged for misconduct, and where evidence suggested that appellant was not discharged.
|
|||||
| Maverick Transp. v. Buzzard, CA 99-839,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, February 9, 2000, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Substantial evidence supported the finding that appellee's testimony, conduct, and work history, was credible. Appellee's physical problems were the result of a new injury or aggravation of a pre-existing condition.
|
|||||
| Moye v. Southeast Foods, Inc., No. CA 99-440,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, February 9, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appeal was dismissed as untimely. Appellant failed to file motion for new trial within ten days of judgment, and notice of appeal was not filed within 30 days after entry of lower court's order.
|
|||||
| Neosho Constr. Co. v. Weaver-Bailey Contrs., CA 99-692,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, February 9, 2000, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment was denied because contract's arbitration clause applied only to disputes regarding written change orders between general contractor and subcontractor or changes made in response to emergency conditions.
|
|||||
| Perry v. State, No. CACR99-373,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, February 9, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Applying totality of circumstances test, in-court identification by witness of appellant in robbery trial was found to be reliable and bolstered by fact that witness could only identify appellant, not other two defendants.
|
|||||
| Sam's Wholesale Club v. Rizzi, No. CA99-776,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, February 9, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Even though video showed employee exceeding restrictions placed on him during recovery, evidence that he had previously returned to work supported award of additional workers' compensation benefits.
|
|||||
| Scott v. State, CA CR 98-1396,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, February 9, 2000, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Decision denying motion to dismiss charges was affirmed because the offense of theft of public benefits was a continuing offense and the statute of limitations had not expired when the prosecution commenced.
|
|||||
| Smith v. McKee Foods, No. CA99-648,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, February 9, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a statute established a maximum attorney's fee which could have been awarded in controverted claims before the workers' compensation commission, the court could not alter the clear meaning of the statute.
|
|||||
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. |
