 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Baker v. Campora, CA 01-1026,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, May 15, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In case involving a head-on automobile collision, mere fact that driver had incurred medical expenses and motorist had admitted liability did not automatically translate into damage award equivalent to those expenses.
|
|||||
| Branum v. State, CACR01-1345,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, May 15, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly denied defendant's request for a brief recess so rape victim could compose herself on witness stand, as nothing in record indicated victim distracted jury to point where a fair trial would have proved impossible.
|
|||||
| Burkhart v. Hutchens, CA01-1290,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, May 15, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Order terminating father's parental rights was filed before statute addressing date father's child support obligation should have terminated too effect. Mother moved for modification of divorce decree's support provisions.
|
|||||
| Congo Stove, Fireplace & Patio, Inc. v. Rickenbacker, CA 01-1390,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, May 15, 2002, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Substantial evidence supported Workers' Compensation Commission decision that employee proved entitlement to compensation benefits. Employee suffered compensable injury and was denied comparable work by employer.
|
|||||
| Heaslet v. State, CA CR 01-230,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, May 15, 2002, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Circuit court erred in denying defendant's motions to suppress as the affidavit in support of search warrant failed to provide factual basis for authorizing nighttime search; trial court took improper notice; affidavit lacked probable cause.
|
|||||
| Nevils v. State, CACR01-1368,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, May 15, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where testimony of defendant and interrogating officer at suppression hearing conflicted, credibility of defendant was for trial judge to determine, and appellate court deferred to superior position of the trial judge in matters of credibility.
|
|||||
| Smeltzer v. Smackover Sch. Dist. No. 39, CA 01-1080,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, May 15, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Principal's breach of claim contract against school district was not within civil rights act, as principal did not show he belonged to protected group or that he applied and was qualified for the superintendent job.
|
|||||
| Smith v. State, CACR01-962,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, May 15, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Fleeing conviction was affirmed when defendant created a substantial danger of death or serious physical injury to another person, manifesting extreme indifference to life, when he drove his vehicle through a residence.
|
|||||
| Sowell v. State, CACR 01-872,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, May 15, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's consent to search his residence was invalid and should have been granted motion to suppress. Police did not have probable cause nor exigent circumstances to justify warrantless activity into defendant's home.
|
|||||
| Stott v. State, CA CR 01-1178,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, May 15, 2002, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court rejected defendant's accomplice liability argument that police officer failed to take immediate steps to prevent him from committing crime, and breathalyzer test was properly conducted and admitted in evidence.
|
|||||
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. |
