 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Game & Fish Comm'n v. Herndon, CR 05-356,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 28, 2005, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The supreme court ordered the parties to rebrief the issues of whether it had jurisdiction to review a circuit court's order dismissing a Ark. Game & Fish Comm'n Code ¿ 15.05 prosecution on grounds of federal preemption, and whether Ark. Game & Fish Comm'n Code ¿ 15.05 had been preempted by certain federal statutes and regulations.
|
|||||
| Bryant v. State, CR 05-405,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 28, 2005, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A court granted the appellant's motion for rule on clerk because the appellant's attorney candidly admitted that the record was tendered late due to a mistake on his part.
|
|||||
| Campbell v. State, No. CR 03-570,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 28, 2005, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court could not reach the merits of defendant's claims regarding the denial of his motion for postconviction relief because he failed to abstract the material parts of the record as required by Ark. Sup. Ct. & Ct. App. R. 4-2(a)(5). The material parts of the record concerned his plea proceeding, whereby he pled guilty to multiple felony charges.
|
|||||
| Helena Reg'l Med. Ctr. v. Wilson, 04-434,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 28, 2005, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a probate proceeding, motions for reconsideration arising from a denial of motions to intervene were timely filed because Ark. Code Ann. ¿ 28-1-115 (2004) applied, and an appeal from the denial of reconsideration was allowed under Ark. Code Ann. ¿ 28-1-116 (2004). The time limits under Ark. R. Civ. P. 52 were not implicated.
|
|||||
| In re Rules of Crim. Procedure, Adoption of Rule 36, [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL],
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 28, 2005, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The supreme court adopted Ark. R. Crim. P. 36 to serve as a comprehensive procedure governing appeals from limited jurisdiction courts to circuit courts to codify existing practice as reflected in Ark. Dist. Ct. R. 9 and relevant state statutes.
|
|||||
| Johnson v. State, No. CR 03-1023,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 28, 2005, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Jordan v. Diamond Equip. & Supply Co., 04-1113,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 28, 2005, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A leasing company was not responsible for the personal injuries sustained by a consumer who rented a skid-steer loader that flipped. The leasing company was entitled to summary judgment pursuant to Ark. R. Civ. P. 56 in the consumer's action, because the lease agreement contained an enforceable exculpatory clause.
|
|||||
| Kelly v. Norris, No. 03-1295,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 28, 2005, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where writ of habeas corpus was granted to inmate due to illegal sentence and inmate was retried and convicted, double jeopardy did not prevent the retrial because inmate voluntarily sought relief for improper sentence, and consequences were a new trial on original charges.
|
|||||
| NCS Healthcare of Ark., Inc. v. W.P. Malone, Inc., 05-332,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 28, 2005, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The supreme court denied a health care company's motion for rule on the clerk where its notice of appeal was not taken from a final order, rendering it a nullity, and there was no docketing of the record or order entered to extend the time for filing as required under Ark. R. App. P. Civ. 5(a) and (b), making it untimely.
|
|||||
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. |
