 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| McKinney v. Bishop, No. 06-1033,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, March 8, 2007, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The estate administrator's appeal was dismissed without prejudice where there was not a final order as to John Does 1-10 nor an Ark. R. Civ. P. 54(b) certification; thus, the Arkansas Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction to hear the case.
|
|||||
| Smith v. Huckabee, No. 06-917,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, March 8, 2007, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment was properly granted for governor and parole board as Ark. Code Ann. § 43-2829 did not require governor to follow parole board recommendations or place restrictions on governor's discretion, which would conflict with Ark. Const. art. 6, § 18; governor was not required to follow any statute in determining whether to grant clemency.
|
|||||
| State v. Jones, No. CR 06-1016,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, March 8, 2007, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under Ark. R. App. P. Crim. 3(a)(1), the State was not allowed to appeal from a decision granting defendant's motion to suppress evidence in a drug case because the issue presented did not involve the correct and uniform administration of the criminal law, it required an intensive factual discussion, and it turned on witness credibility.
|
|||||
| Thomas v. Avant, No. 06-983,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, March 8, 2007, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In custody matter, because record on appeal was missing transcript from hearing on mother's motion for venue change and father tacitly agreed to abbreviated record, mother had to provide certified supplemental record that included transcript under Ark. R. App. P. Civ. 6 and to re-brief venue issue pursuant to Ark. Sup. Ct. & Ct. App. R. 4-2(a).
|
|||||
| Thompson v. Supreme Court Comm. on Prof'l Conduct, No. 06-1069,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, March 8, 2007, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney violated Ark. Model R. Prof. Conduct 3.1 and 4.4 where he knowingly filed a lis pendens notice in a civil suit seeking damages and even after being notified that it was improper, took almost two months to make any attempt to correct his error. Given attorney's prior record, reprimand under Ark. Sup. Ct. Prof. Conduct P. § 17(D) was proper.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
