 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Teague v. State , CACR06-962,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, May 2, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where seventy-seven marijuana plants were confiscated near defendant's residence, he admitted that the plants were his and that he was growing them for medicinal purposes. The evidence was sufficient to support his conviction for manufacturing marijuana, Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-101. He was not entitled to a directed verdict.
|
|||||
| Wal-Mart Assocs. v. Davis, CA06-1109,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, May 2, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a neurosurgeon wrote that the employee suffered a work injury when she fell from a ladder, his opinion regarding the cause of the employee's herniated discs was unequivocal; the appellate court concluded that his opinion was stated within a reasonable degree of medical certainty as required by Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-102(16)(B).
|
|||||
| Williams v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs. , CA06-1003,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, May 2, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a case where a benefits claimant fell down stairs on her way to an employer's lunch room, the injury was not compensable under Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-102(4)(A)(i) because she was not advancing the interest of the employer at the time, despite "shop talk" that occurred in the lunch room.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
