 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Boyd v. State, No. CR06-973,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, March 15, 2007, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Despite defendant's assertion that a shooting was accidental, a motion for a directed verdict was properly denied because there was sufficient evidence to support a conviction for capital murder under Ark. Code Ann. § 5-10-101(a)(4) based on the testimony of witnesses to the crime, and the fact that the victim was shot several times.
|
|||||
| Crossno v. State, No. CR06-849,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, March 15, 2007, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the findings of fact from a circuit court determined that defendant waived the right to appeal by failing to file a pro se notice in a timely manner, a prior decision finding attorney error in the case was set aside.
|
|||||
| Erin, Inc. v. White County Circuit Court, No. 06-1058,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, March 15, 2007, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A writ of prohibition was granted in a case where it was unclear whether an employee was allowed to file suit against a company and its officer as third parties under Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-410(a) since the case should have been transferred to the Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission for this determination.
|
|||||
| First Sec. Bank v. Estate of Leonard, No. 06-1025,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, March 15, 2007, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the guardian of the wife's estate failed to timely obtain letters of administration within forty days of the wife's death, the guardian failed to comply with Ark. Code Ann. § 28-65-323. The guardian lost it's authority to prosecute an action to contest her husband's will on her behalf.
|
|||||
| Grayson v. Ross, No. 06-946,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, March 15, 2007, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a case involving medical care for a pre-trial detainee who died after being arrested for driving while impaired, the proper standard under Ark. Code Ann. § 16-123-105(a) was the deliberate indifference standard. The standard was set forth in response to a certified question from a federal appeals court.
|
|||||
| Halfacre v. State, No. CACR 85-171,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, March 15, 2007, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where an inmate challenged his wife's testimony under Ark. R. Evid. 504, his petition to proceed with a petition for writ of error coram nobis was denied because the fact that his wife testified at his trial could not be considered a fundamental error of fact extrinsic to the record, or hidden or unknown at trial.
|
|||||
| Hall v. Norris, No. 06-828,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, March 15, 2007, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The denial of an inmate's petition for a writ of habeas corpus was appropriate because he failed to meet his burden under Ark. Code Ann. § 16-112-103, in part because the inmate's claim did not establish that the trial court failed to speak certain words when the plea of guilty was accepted.
|
|||||
| Hanners v. Giant Oil Co. of Ark., Inc., No. 06-800,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, March 15, 2007, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An appeal in a contract dispute was dismissed because a counterclaim was not considered by a trial court; therefore, there was not a final judgment under Ark. R. App. P. Civ. 2(a)(1) and Ark. R. Civ. P. 54(b).
|
|||||
| Heard v. Regions Bank, No. 06-1040,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, March 15, 2007, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a former ward asserted a fiduciary misconduct claim against a bank and appealed from the decision approving the bank's final accounting, remand was warranted pursuant to Ark. R. App. P. Civ. 6(e) because the record and addendum were incomplete; the ward was ordered to supplement the addendum under Ark. Sup. Ct. & Ct. App. R. 4-2.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
