 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Hawkins v. State, No. CACR 99-814,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, March 8, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Revocation of appellant's probation was affirmed because the revocation occurred because appellant violated conditions of his probation that included the use of alcoholic beverages, and not because he was an alcoholic.
|
|||||
| Hernreich-Beller v. Hernreich, No. CA 99-747,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, March 8, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Daughter's claim of ownership by gift of funds in brokerage account held jointly with father was not valid since the required unconditional delivery of the funds never took place and therefore no valid gift was completed.
|
|||||
| Keeney v. Foreman Sch. Dist., No. CA99-991,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, March 8, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellant's permanent impairment rating in workers' compensation decision was based upon results of those tests that did not come under appellant's voluntary control, the tests which presented objective findings.
|
|||||
| Lang v. Guthrie Wood Fibers, Inc., No. CA99-924,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, March 8, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where testimony from appellant from workers' compensation denial case indicated he had suffered previous injuries to his back, denial of compensation was not clear error by Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission.
|
|||||
| Limon v. Arkansas Dep't of Human Servs., No. CA99-859,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, March 8, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Termination of parental rights affirmed. Mother failed to comply with case plan and to keep children's home sanitary. Her conduct manifested an incapacity or indifference to remedying factors that prevented reunification.
|
|||||
| Martin v. State, No. CACR99-812,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, March 8, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Criminal appellant who cause an injury to the victims stomach by cutting her with a box cutter was properly convicted of first-degree battery where the injury could reasonably be considered a serious physical injury.
|
|||||
| Medlock v. State, No. CACR 99-581,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, March 8, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where criminal appellant challenging revocation of his suspended sentence failed to show objective proof of bias by the sentencing judge, he failed to demonstrate a reason for the judge's recusal; the sentence was affirmed.
|
|||||
| Miller v. State, CA CR 99-550,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISIONS ONE TWO AND THREE, March 8, 2000, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Any intrusion upon right of privacy under the United States Constitution by the police knocking at the back door was, at most, minimal and did not approach the level of substantiality.
|
|||||
| Moore v. State, No. CACR 99-832,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, March 8, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The denial of a motion to dismiss for lack of a speedy trial was affirmed where appellant waived any error with respect to the disputed time period after appellant's trial counsel filed a motion for a continuance.
|
|||||
| Reese v. State, No. CACR99-763,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, March 8, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because accomplice did not recall facts, trial court admitted his former testimony into evidence. As appellant did not object to admission of testimony as hearsay, issue could not be addressed for the first time on appeal.
|
|||||
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. |
