 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Okla. Gas Corp. v. Boggs, CA 03-956,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, April 21, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a gas corporation's condemnation action, the trial court did not err in admitting the testimony of the land owner and his expert regarding the value of the land the corporation sought to condemn to build a pipeline and a metering station.
|
|||||
| Avila v. State, CACR03-1011,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, April 21, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Conviction against defendant was affirmed, because it was established that the police officer had reasonable cause to arrest defendant when he fled, the search was lawful incident to the arrest, and the gun was adequately identified for admission.
|
|||||
| Buchanan v. Buchanan, CA03-388,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, April 21, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The circuit court made a mistake by giving a mother child custody upon reconsideration of an order granting custody to the father. The mother's erratic lifestyle proved that a change in custody to the father was in the child's best interest.
|
|||||
| Cato Corp. v. Phillips Invs., Inc., CA03-1047,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, April 21, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellant's addendum was deficient because it failed to include the notice of appeal, the notice of cross-appeal, the amended complaint, or the motion for summary judgment. Appellant had 30 days to file a substituted abstract, addendum, and brief.
|
|||||
| Corbin v. State, CACR03-804,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, April 21, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on sexual abuse in the first degree because it was not a lesser-included offense of rape. The sexual abuse statute contained elements that were not required under the rape statute.
|
|||||
| Hanna v. Glover, CA03-939,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, April 21, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Individual drafted agreements whereby cabinet makers would supply manufacturer and individual would receive a percentage. The terms were definite enough to comprise a contract. Consistent performance established cabinet makers' intent to be bound.
|
|||||
| Hawkins v. State, CA03-1096,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, April 21, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Effect of amendment was to delete requirement that juveniles adjudicated delinquent for the commission of commercial burglary had to submit to DNA sample, however subject act did not apply retroactively to defendant adjudicated before effective date.
|
|||||
| Herzog v. Glover, CA02-796,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, April 21, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: After a buyer defaulted on payments for a ranch, the trial court properly rendered a judgment in favor the seller. The buyer was not entitled to a continuance or to have a juror stricken. The seller was entitled to attorney fees.
|
|||||
| Hutchinson v. Ark. Prof'l Bail Bondsman Licensing Bd., CA03-1097,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, April 21, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Despite bail bondsman's contention that he was "set up," substantial evidence existed to conclude that he entered the jail for purpose of writing bonds without having been invited by a detainee. Six month suspension was not arbitrary and capricious.
|
|||||
| McAdams v. Lipscomb, CA 03-1241,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, April 21, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: There was no proof of service of the notice, but there was proof offered that plaintiff was avoiding the service. Thus, sanctions were not appropriate. Sanctions for contempt for evading service were also improper as no arrest warrant was issued.
|
|||||
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. |
