 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| McKee Foods Coporation Risk Mgmt. Res. v. Christie, CA02-986,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, March 12, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where physicians who treated employee all opined that employee's back pain was a result of her employment, employee proved that her compensable injury was the major cause of her disability or need for treatment.
|
|||||
| Office of Child Support Enforcement v. King, CA 02-481,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, March 12, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court erred in finding that agency's failure to raise issue of child-support arrearages, accrued under existing order, at time new order of child support was entered, acted as bar by res judicata in later motion to seek collection of arrears.
|
|||||
| Peterson v. State, CA CR 02-761,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, March 12, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence of 15 years' imprisonment was improper, where the trial court was not permitted to use the habitual offender statute in conjunction with the DWI sentencing enhancement provision.
|
|||||
| Price v. State, CACR02-436,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, March 12, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: There was substantial evidence that defendant exercised unauthorized control over the stolen property and to support his theft of property conviction; therefore, the trial court properly denied his motion for a directed verdict of acquittal.
|
|||||
| Ray v. State, CACR02-472,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, March 12, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court could not say that the trial court's conclusion that defendant violated his probation was clearly against a preponderance of the evidence when at least two witnesses testified that they observed him firing a weapon on school property.
|
|||||
| Tds Erectors v. Estes, CA 02-727,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, March 12, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The appellate court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the contractors' appeal from the denial of their motion to vacate where the trial court lost jurisdiction to act on the motion after 90 days had passed from the entry of the original order.
|
|||||
| Timmons v. State, CA CR 02-657,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, March 12, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The revocation of defendant's probation and sentence were both proper, where the trial court acted within the scope of its jurisdiction and where his illegal sentence appeal was untimely.
|
|||||
| Tomlin v. Wal-Mart Stores, CA 02-147,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISIONS TWO AND THREE, March 12, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In slip and fall case, there was no evidence from which jury could have determined, without speculation, how strapping band came to be on floor or how long it was there prior to accident, and judgment notwithstanding verdict for store was proper.
|
|||||
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. |
