 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| McCarty v. McCarty, CA05-1235,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, May 17, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly distributed unequally a government savings account pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 9-12-315(a) (2002) when the marriage lasted only four years, husband contributed almost all of the funds, and the wife looted the account to support her paramour. However, when husband was employable, a bank account should have been divided equally.
|
|||||
| Parker v. Johnson, CA05-1350,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, May 17, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Res judicata did not apply to bar a homestead issue because it was not fully and fairly litigated previously; trial court did not err in finding that a homestead exemption applied to bar attachment of judgment liens because once acquired the right did not terminate by divorce and the creditors failed to show an intent to abandon the homestead.
|
|||||
| Price v. Rylwell, LLC, CA05-908,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, May 17, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where tax notices sent to a landowner contained the sale dates and the tracts were offered for sale at public auctions on those dates, the requirements of Ark. Code Ann. § 26-37-301 were satisfied. The conveyance of each tract was in conformity with Arkansas law.
|
|||||
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. |
