 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Bray v. Int'l Wire Group, CA05-1125,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, May 10, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission erred in denying an employee medical benefits for visits to his regular physician where the situation was a treating specialist releasing his patient and referring him back to his original treating physician, who was authorized to treat him pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-514(b) (2002).
|
|||||
| Brown v. McMillian, CA05-1175,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, May 10, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although damages were properly awarded to the buyer of an automobile in his action for conversion against the seller's attorney after the attorney repossessed the vehicle, the trial court erred in awarding attorney fees to the buyer; Ark. Code Ann. § 16-22-308 (1999) did not provide for the recovery of attorney fees in tort actions.
|
|||||
| Cornice v. Baptist Health, CA05-857,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, May 10, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The granting of the employee's claim for reasonably necessary medical expenses in a workers' compensation action was improper where there was sufficient evidence to support the conclusion that the employee failed to establish by medical evidence supported by objective findings an aggravation of her preexisting bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome.
|
|||||
| Croston v. State, CACR05-831,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, May 10, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court affirmed defendant's conviction because while defendant did have the right not to be tried in prison garb, defendant was offered civilian clothing to wear and defendant turned it down, and defendant did not have a constitutional right to be provided clothing of a particular style.
|
|||||
| Death & Permanent Total Disability Trust Fund v. Legacy Ins. Servs. , CA05-732,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, May 10, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Insurance carrier was entitled to a credit for payments made toward a twenty-nine percent permanent-anatomical-impairment rating against its $75,000 maximum liability for permanent-total-disability benefits pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-502(b).
|
|||||
| Goforth v. Goforth, CA 005-1222,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, May 10, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court's modification order vesting custody of the parties' children in the father was appropriate where, no matter how well-explained, the mother's often erratic behavior was shown to have had a deleterious effect on the children.
|
|||||
| Harris v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., CA 05-1121,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, May 10, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a surveillance video showed an employee engaging in normal activities without restrictions, and no objective medical evidence established that the employee sustained a lower back injury when she fell at work, the finding that the employee did not prove a compensable injury under Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-102(4)(d) was affirmed.
|
|||||
| Home Care Prof'ls of Ark., Inc. v. Williams, E04-280,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISIONS ONE AND TWO, May 10, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A home care company was properly found to be liable for unemployment insurance taxes based on its caregivers' remunerations where company failed to satisfy second exemption requirement in Ark. Code Ann. § 11-10-210(e); caregivers represented the company's interest on clients' premises, not just in a tangential fashion, but in the most direct sense.
|
|||||
| Morris v. Young, CA 05-1242,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, May 10, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In landowners' quiet title action against their neighbors, the trial court properly found in the landowners' favor, finding that the fence in question was the boundary by acquiescence as the fence had existed for over 60 years and had been respected by the parties and their predecessors in title as the boundary line between the properties.
|
|||||
| Roark v. Pocahontas Nursing & Rehab., CA 05-1226,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, May 10, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Employee was properly denied workers' compensation benefits where the provisions of Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-505(a)(1) were not applicable to her case; it was the employee's actions, by not clearing her days off with her new supervisor when she returned to light-duty work and by taking day off without permission, that caused her job to be terminated.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
