 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Allen v. State, CA02-536,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, February 12, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court properly denied defendant's motion to transfer his aggravated assault case to the juvenile court, due to the violent and serious nature of the crime and where testimony at the transfer hearing substantiated the charges.
|
|||||
| Anderson v. Anderson, CA 02-420,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, February 12, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence supported trial court's finding that father had not shown material change in circumstances justifying change in custody from mother to the father as being in the best interests of the child. Evidence supported award of attorney fees.
|
|||||
| Arrow Int'l v. Sparks, CA 02-75,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, February 12, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A finding in favor of the administratrix in her wrongful death action against the manufacturer was proper where the opinion by her physician witness did not require him to be an expert in any field other than the one in which he was qualified.
|
|||||
| Baker v. State, CACR02-324,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, February 12, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver was affirmed where defendant had not preserved his sole point of error for appellate review that the trial court excluded his testimony about a plea offer.
|
|||||
| Barnett v. Monumental Gen. Ins. Co., CA 01-1401,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISIONS TWO, THREE AND FOUR, February 12, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court did not have the authority to set aside its original summary judgment order and issue a duplicate order over one year later so that appellants' notice of appeal would be considered timely. The appeal was dismissed.
|
|||||
| Biggs v. State, CACR02-573,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, February 12, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant admitted that he retrieved gun and proceeded to shoot stepfather, and medical examiner testified that victim died from gunshot wound to head, substantial evidence supported defendant's conviction for first-degree murder.
|
|||||
| Bishop v. City of Fayetteville, CA 02-399,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, February 12, 2003, Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Landowners asserted that easement granted by their predecessors related only to water utilities. However, trial judge was correct in construing easement as conveying unrestricted access right of way, in addition to utility easement.
|
|||||
| Burke v. State, CACR02-233,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, February 12, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's abstract did not contain a coherent abridgment of the testimony essential to an understanding of the merits of his appeal and was flagrantly deficient, but the appellate court allowed him the opportunity to submit a compliant brief.
|
|||||
| Davis v. State, CA CR 02-564,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, February 12, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court deprived defendant of his right to a jury trial, as there was no evidence that defendant was informed of his right to be tried by a jury or that he executed a knowing, voluntary, and intelligent waiver of that right.
|
|||||
| Gailey v. Allstate Ins. Co., CA02-184,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, February 12, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court's order, which failed to dispose of the insurer's pending cross-claim for contribution and indemnity, was not a final order for purposes of appeal; therefore, the appellate court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.
|
|||||
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. |
