 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Newton v. State, CACR 99-1293,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, June 28, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Instruction on lesser-included offense of manslaughter was proper because appellant did not claim in lower court that he was prejudiced by his inability to defend against that charge and he did not show that there was no basis for instruction.
|
|||||
| Office of Child Support Enforcement v. Pittman, CA 99-1297,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, June 28, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Modification of father's child support obligation to minor daughter was reversed and remanded, so that lower court could consider additional evidence regarding appellee's current financial condition.
|
|||||
| Shoffey v. Progressive Northwestern Ins. Co., CA 99-1283,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISIONS ONE AND TWO, June 28, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment was properly granted to insurance company because it mailed cancellation notice to insured, which was sufficient proof of receipt and thus, the policy was not in effect at the time of the accident.
|
|||||
| Skinner v. Southwest State Dev. Council, CA99-1168,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, June 28, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of workers' compensation benefits affirmed where substantial evidence standard of review indicated workers' compensation commission's opinion displayed substantial basis for the denial of the relief sought.
|
|||||
| Strong v. State, CACR99-1007,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, June 28, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Even the constitutional issue of cruel and unusual punishment, not raised at trial, during sentencing, or in a post-trial motion for relief from the sentence, and thus not preserved for appeal, could not be raised for the first time on appeal.
|
|||||
| Temple v. State, CACR99-1193,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, June 28, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where appellant nearly choked a little girl unconscious and dragged her a block away to where it was dark, the restraint could be found to be more than incidental to a rape thus justifying a kidnapping conviction.
|
|||||
| Trimble Navigation Ltd. v. Papachristou, CA99-900,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, June 28, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In dispute as to sale and delivery of goods, seller, alleging that customer failed to pay, did not meet burden, and there was no reversible error in excluding evidence and in not considering customer's absence from trial.
|
|||||
| Vant v. Long, CA 99-1383,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISIONS ONE AND TWO, June 28, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although passenger could not state cause of accident, summary judgment for driver was inappropriate, as there was genuine issue of fact regarding driver's negligence; driver's deposition contained virtual admission of negligence.
|
|||||
| Whitfield v. State, CA CR 99-1400,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, June 28, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction for robbery affirmed where, on appeal, defendant raised issues not objected to at trial and challenged the jury's verdict based on pure speculation.
|
|||||
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. |
