 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Ark. Bd. of Embalmers & Funeral Dirs. v. Reddick, No. 05-952,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 13, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: State supreme court found enough evidence in record to uphold Arkansas Board of Embalmers and Funeral Directors' finding that funeral director violated rules governing funeral homes because he did not make a reasonable attempt to fulfill desires of decedent's survivors, and it affirmed Board's decision to suspend director's license for two years.
|
|||||
| Armstrong v. State, No. CR05-1028,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 13, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's two convictions for capital murder were proper where evidence of an acrimonious divorce and evidence that defendant owed the victim, his estranged wife, back child support could have provided a motive for the killing. Therefore, the admission of that evidence was appropriate pursuant to Ark. R. Evid. 404(b).
|
|||||
| Crisler v. Unum Ins. Co. of Am., No. 05-919,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 13, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in finding that decedent's death was not "accidental bodily injury" and that policy exclusion for illness or disease applied, as the statistical probability of death from anaphylactic shock resulting from an allergic reaction to an antibiotic was very low, and was an unexpected occurrence very much outside usual course of things.
|
|||||
| Farmers Ins. Co. v. Snowden, No. 05-527,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 13, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Circuit court did not abuse its discretion when it granted the individual's motion for class certification under Ark. R. Civ. P. 23 where the certified class was susceptible to precise definition, and the requirements of commonality, predominance, and superiority were also satisfied.
|
|||||
| In re Wommack , No. 06-356,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 13, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Jackson v. State, No. CR 06-151,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 13, 2006, Opinion Delivered , April 13, 2006, Order Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court dismissed an inmate's appeal from the trial court's denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus as the inmate did not direct the writ to the person in whose custody the inmate had been detained as required by Ark. Code Ann. § 16-112-105.
|
|||||
| Johnson v. Burnett, No. CR 06-239,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 13, 2006, Opinion Delivered , April 13, 2006, Order Issued
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court denied an inmate's petition for a writ of mandamus to correct a sentence imposed after the trial court granted the inmate's petition for postconviction relief because it was clear that mandamus was not the proper remedy to raise the question in the appellate court.
|
|||||
| Lee v. State, CR 99-1116,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 13, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| McLane Southern, Inc. v. Davis, No. 05-990,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 13, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The Arkansas Unfair Cigarette Sales Act, Ark. Code. Ann. § 4-75-701 et seq. (2005), as amended by Act No. 627, Ark. Acts 2003, was not unconstitutional under the due-process provisions of Ark. Const. art. 2, § 8 and the Fourteenth Amendment, as a rational basis existed for each of the amendments.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
