 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Exxtra Help, Inc. v. Muldrew, CA01-932,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, March 6, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Workers' compensation commission properly determined employee suffered compensable gradual onset shoulder injury and by awarding open-ended medical and TTD benefits, and refusing to find injury was non-work related arthritic change.
|
|||||
| Golden v. State, CACR01-958,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, March 6, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence was sufficient to support possession of marijuana conviction as defendant's knowledge and control of marijuana residue in residence were supported by fact that buy money and bags containing marijuana residue were found in residence.
|
|||||
| Ilo v. State, CA CR 01-1066,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, March 6, 2002, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred by denying defendant's motion to suppress where tenuous facts and circumstances of a particular entry to execute search warrant did not justify dispensing with the knock-and-announce requirement.
|
|||||
| Ireland v. Levesque, CA 01-865,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, March 6, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to give plaintiff's proffered jury instruction that defendant was required to yield the right of way from a private road where there was no evidence the parking area was privately owned.
|
|||||
| J & V. Rest. Supply Refrigeration v. Supreme Fixture Co., CA 01-687,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, March 6, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Constitutionally required minimum contacts existed as customer purposefully availed itself of privilege of conducting business in state and trial court properly denied motion to enlarge response time where delay was occasioned by carelessness.
|
|||||
| McGee v. State, CACR 01-740,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, March 6, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress evidence of a methamphetamine lab discovered on his property where he consented to a search of his property and in no way limited the scope of the search.
|
|||||
| Terry v. State, CACR 00-897,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, March 6, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court ordered the State and defendant's counsel to rebrief to address the issue of whether legislative amendments affected prior case law on the trial court's jurisdiction to revoke defendant's suspended sentence.
|
|||||
| Vincent v. Allen, CA 01-550,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, March 6, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court's denial of a mother's motion to set aside a divorce decree was not final and appealable, as the issues of child support and change of custody were left unresolved, and the order was not certified for appeal.
|
|||||
| Wal-Mart Stores v. Holmes, CA01-1006,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, March 6, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Commission's findings that objective medical evidence supported existence of claimant's injury and that the injury was major cause of her need for treatment were supported by substantial evidence, and thus, award of benefits to her was proper.
|
|||||
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. |
