 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Blake v. Urrutia, Inc., CA 07-863,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, March 19, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Claver v. Wilbur, CA07-871,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, March 19, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Cuellar v. State, No. CACR 07-1055,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, March 19, 2008, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Delpozo v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., CA07-1289,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, March 19, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Hogan v. State, CACR07-1070,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, March 19, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Hudson v. Hudson, CA07-1000,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, March 19, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Jordan v. Home Depot, Inc., CA07-1031,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, March 19, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Kelley v. State, CACR07-633,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, March 19, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Lance v. Scott, No. CA 07-976,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, March 19, 2008, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a conversion case, there was no error in ordering a neighbor to return two cows to an owner; however, damages were properly not awarded for the conversion of the cows' offspring because the neighbor had incurred considerable expenses in caring for the cows. In addition, the owner had been using the neighbor's bull to breed his cows.
|
|||||
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. |
