 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Adamson v. Sims, CA 03-840,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, March 3, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In airplane owner's appeal of being held liable for conversion of an airplane hangar, judgment was reversed; the hangar was not a fixture.
|
|||||
| Bunn v. State, CACR03-280,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, March 3, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Consent and exigent circumstances let police enter a boarding house and suspect's room in boarding house, where firearms were in plain view. Erroneous introduction, at sentencing, of a conviction for which defendant was not represented was harmless.
|
|||||
| Carroll Elec. Coop. v. Pack, CA 03-884,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, March 3, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A statute of limitations did not bar an employee's claim for continued workers' compensation benefits because the employer reduced payments without authorization and the employee's claim was merely to enforce a prior order.
|
|||||
| Dodd v. Sparks Reg'l Med. Ctr., CA03-624,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, March 3, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court granted medical center's motion for summary judgment in a wrongful death suit brought by estate administrator; however, trial court failed to rule on claims against unknown parties, and there was no certification. Appeal was dismissed.
|
|||||
| Eaton v. State, CA CR 03-856,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, March 3, 2004, Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A jury could have properly inferred that defendant's act of performing oral sex on a nine-year-old victim was an "act of sexual gratification," and, accordingly, substantial evidence supported her conviction for rape.
|
|||||
| Gulley v. State, CACR03-83,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, March 3, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because all of the evidence showed that defendant delivered a controlled substance in exchange for money, his motion for a directed verdict based on an improper chain of custody was properly denied.
|
|||||
| Hall v. State, CACR 03-642,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, March 3, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The drug paraphernalia found in defendant's home, coupled with defendant's own statements that he had been cleaning to avoid getting in trouble, supported his conviction of possessing drug paraphernalia with intent to manufacture methamphetamine.
|
|||||
| Harrison v. State, CACR 03-111,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, March 3, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In drug defendant's appeal of admission of crime lab report at trial, judgment was affirmed; State specifically provided in responses to discovery that it intended to introduce the crime lab report, among other evidence.
|
|||||
| Henderson v. Riverside Furniture, CA03-877,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, March 3, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because physicians stated that an employee did not meet the criteria for reflex sympathetic dystrophy, the employee was properly denied permanent partial disability benefits.
|
|||||
| Holt v. State, CA CR 03-15,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, March 3, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court reversed defendant's drug-related convictions and remanded for a new trial; trial court erred in allowing testimony of two police officers from another state regarding defendant's previous arrest for possession of items of drug paraphernalia.
|
|||||
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. |
