 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Bradley v. Std. Register Co., CA04-839,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, March 9, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An employee's failure to request a program of rehabilitation did not constitute substantial evidence that he waived the right to permanent disability benefits in excess of his permanent impairment rating under Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-505 (2002); the employee did not have the capacity to earn a college degree based solely on his past education.
|
|||||
| C & W Acquisition, LLC v. Whittington, CA 04-820,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, March 9, 2005, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An award of an attorney's fee to the husband as the "prevailing party" in the company's action to recover on a credit card was improper pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 16-22-308 (1999) because the company was the prevailing party since judgment was rendered in its favor on its complaint for a money judgment regarding the credit card account.
|
|||||
| Gondolfi v. State, CACR03-1427,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, March 9, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Even if a confidential informant was not qualified to identify the substance that defendant was convicted of delivering as methamphetamine, defendant failed to show how he was prejudiced by the confidential informant's testimony considering that a chemist confirmed that the substance at issue was indeed methamphetamine.
|
|||||
| Grady v. Fortenberry, CA04-601,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, March 9, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court's certificate did not comply with the requirements of Ark. R. Civ. P. 54(b) because it did not appear immediately after the court's signature on its order entering partial summary judgment, and it contained no specific factual findings as to why there was no just reason to delay sellers' appeal from the partial summary judgment.
|
|||||
| Green v. State, No. CACR04-774,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, March 9, 2005, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The totality of the circumstances was sufficient to give rise to reasonable suspicion for the officers to stop defendant and investigate his truck; the witness's report was sufficiently corroborated by the police.
|
|||||
| Harris v. State, CACR 04-314,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, March 9, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant was properly convicted of aggravated robbery under Ark. Code Ann. §§ 5-12-102, 5-12-103 (1997) where the evidence showed that he was inside a store when another individual pointed a gun at the owner, defendant helped participate in removing items from the store, and witnesses saw defendant with a gun.
|
|||||
| Hickson v. Southern Refrigerated Transp., CA04-864,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, March 9, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court reversed a commission's decision that employee did not prove his hernia was caused by a work related accident because the ALJ had admitted a doctor's report that contained erroneous information about the claimant's complaints at the emergency room and the ALJ admitted testimony based on a report that the claimant had not seen.
|
|||||
| Icenhower v. DeQueen Sch. Dist., CA04-874,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, March 9, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission did not err in finding that, under Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-508, employee was not entitled to additional medical treatment where treating physician did not state that additional treatment was necessary regarding the injury and the employer allowed for two more years of additional treatment by its physician.
|
|||||
| Lainhart v. State, CACR 04-459,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, March 9, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A motion to suppress evidence seized at a residence pursuant to a search warrant was properly denied because defendant lacked standing under the Fourth Amendment to challenge the search of his mother's residence; defendant was not an overnight guest there at the time, despite the fact that he had stayed there in the past.
|
|||||
| Lawrence v. Sullivan, CA 04-398,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISIONS TWO AND THREE, March 9, 2005, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: It was error for the trial court to determine that it had venue to probate a decedent's will because Ark. Code Ann. § 28-40-102 required the will to be probated in the county where the decedent resided at the time of his death, regardless of where the decedent was domiciled.
|
|||||
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. |
