 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Fulmer v. State, CACR02-932,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, April 30, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The lawyer was found in willful contempt of the court of appeals for failure to file a timely appellate brief for his client, as previously ordered by the court, and was reported to the state committee on professional conduct.
|
|||||
| Graves v. State, CACR01-343,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, April 30, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant did not object to the sentences imposed by the trial court, he had no standing to complain on appeal.
|
|||||
| Green v. City of Jacksonville, CA 02-917,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, April 30, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in granting city's motion for summary judgment where the trial court concluded it lacked jurisdiction to determine whether the city exceeded its authority. The trial court had the duty to determine whether it had jurisdiction.
|
|||||
| Holt Bonding Co. v. First Fed. Bank, CA 02-735,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, April 30, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A company was liable to a bank as an endorser on a check returned for insufficient funds, as a bondsman had actual authority to endorse the check. It was irrelevant that the bondsman later misappropriated the funds.
|
|||||
| Hutchens v. Bella Vista Vill. Prop. Owners' Ass'n, CA 02-925,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, April 30, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A property owners' association was allowed to change a declaration to allow a two-tiered property assessment scheme because the declaration was not a restrictive covenant. Moreover, the new regulation was not arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable.
|
|||||
| Johnson County v. Beavers, CA02-1049,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, April 30, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission properly relied on claimant's personal physician's opinion, over that of spinal cord specialist, that home whirlpool constituted reasonably necessary medical treatment for claimant's compensable injuries.
|
|||||
| Jordan v. State, CACR 02-837,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, April 30, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress contraband discovered during a pat-down search for weapons, where his demeanor and presence in a high crime area gave rise to a reasonable suspicion that he was armed and dangerous.
|
|||||
| Lord v. State, CACR02-674,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, April 30, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although defendant argued that the trial court erred in admitting a videotape taken of him, the appellate court declined to assume prejudicial error, where defendant offered no proof of it.
|
|||||
| Malone v. State, CACR02-1062,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, April 30, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant failed to provide support for her argument that it was against public policy to allow law enforcement officers to make observations of illegal activity outside their jurisdictions, defendant's conviction was affirmed.
|
|||||
| Martindale v. Estate of Martindale, CA 02-858,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, April 30, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Decedent was not the sole owner of cattle and equipment at the time of his death. Widow presented evidence that she was a joint owner where the joint bank accounts were held by the entirety, and all property was purchased from these accounts.
|
|||||
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. |
