Arkansas, June, 2002, State Case law

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!

State Courts - Arkansas - June 19, 2002

Maynard v. Belden Wire & Cable, CA01-1403, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, June 19, 2002, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Employers were not in contempt as evidence supported the finding that the employee was not denied access to the physician and the employers granted treatment. There were delays in paying pharmacy bills, but the balance was ultimately paid.

Search Cases for Free

Mays v. State, CACR01-1088, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, June 19, 2002, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Conviction for felon in possession of firearm was affirmed. As defendant admitted to only one element of crime, firearm possession, not the entire crime, corpus delicti rule did not require corroboration of his confession.

Search Cases for Free

Miller v. Pro-Transportation, CA 02-83, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, June 19, 2002, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Summary judgment grant to trucking company was proper as exculpatory clause in passenger authorization form the injured passenger signed was valid. Its language clearly and specifically set out negligent liability to be avoided.

Search Cases for Free

Rogers v. Rogers, CA01-790, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, June 19, 2002, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: There was insufficient corroboration of residency by the mother, as there was no substantial evidence of her residency for 60 days prior to filing the complaint. There was no evidence of unconscionability concerning the premarital agreement.

Search Cases for Free

Ross v. State, CACR 01-859, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, June 19, 2002, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Where defendant was convicted for simultaneous possession of drugs and firearms and for other drug offenses, court did not err by denying his motion to suppress evidence and statement made to police and by denying his motion for directed verdict.

Search Cases for Free

Communities Portal