 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Hooker v. Agribank, No. CA99-288,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, March 1, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment for bank in action for judgment on note and for foreclosure on real property was affirmed since exceptions to statute requiring certificate of authority for foreign corporations transacting business applied.
|
|||||
| Key v. Fite, No. CA 99-827,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, March 1, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Order denying mother's petition for change of custody of daughter was affirmed because mother's evidence of her remarriage and fact she was no longer employed was insufficient to show material change in circumstances.
|
|||||
| Khamsomphou v. Petit Jean Poultry, Inc., No. CA99-640,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, March 1, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A worker's rapid repetitive motion on the job was the major cause of her shoulder injury and the injury was therefore compensable under workers' compensation; worker's pre-existing double-jointedness was not a major cause.
|
|||||
| Kilburn v. State, No. CACR99-523,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, March 1, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the State met its burden by showing that appellant failed to pay restitution and appellant's testimony was not credible, a preponderance of the evidence supported the revocation of appellant's suspended sentence.
|
|||||
| Leatherwood v. State, CA CR 99-522,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISIONS TWO, THREE AND FOUR, March 1, 2000, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a criminal appeal, evidence was sufficient to prove that appellant was the same person that had a felony conviction from Texas as the court records from both states showed same name, date of birth, and signature.
|
|||||
| Miller v. Leou, No. CA99-833,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, March 1, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The denial of a motion for a new trial was affirmed because the jury properly afforded one doctor's testimony greater weight and there was substantial evidence presented that supported the jury's verdict.
|
|||||
| Morgan v. State, No. CACR99-393,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, March 1, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant failed to make a specific motion for a directed verdict which advised the trial court of the exact element of the crime that the state had failed to prove and therefore the convictions were affirmed.
|
|||||
| Nichols v. State, CA CR 99-354,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, March 1, 2000, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of all charges was inconsistent with request for lesser included instruction, no abuse of discretion when motion for severance denied, claims of trial judge bias and ineffective assistance of counsel were not preserved.
|
|||||
| Ritchie v. State, No. CACR 99-885,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, March 1, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A motion to suppress evidence was affirmed where the arresting officers saw a vial on the floorboard of appellant's vehicle and knew with reasonable certainty that the vial contained a controlled substance.
|
|||||
| Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Bernard, CA 99-409,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISIONS ONE AND FOUR, March 1, 2000, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Retail store was entitled to directed verdict because injured plaintiff failed to show store caused water to pool or that store knew or should have known of condition and failed to remove it.
|
|||||
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. |
