 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Adaway v. State, CACR 97-1022,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, September 20, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellant's convictions of battery and fleeing were affirmed, and appellant's counsel's motion to be relieved was granted, because there was no merit to the appeal.
|
|||||
| Anderson v. State, CACR00-154,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, September 20, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellant's felony conviction was affirmed, though evidence was circumstantial, as his confession was sufficiently corroborated by other testimony. Jury could infer without speculation that he committed the robbery.
|
|||||
| Arkansas Presbytery of the Cumberland Presbyterian Church v. Hudson, CA00-14,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, September 20, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appeal by presbytery of order quieting title in church based on its counterclaim was dismissed. Order was not appealable because presbytery's replevin action had not yet been adjudicated or otherwise disposed of.
|
|||||
| Bolton v. Conagra, CA00-127,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, September 20, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Decision adopting finding that appellant failed to prove compensable injury in workers' compensation case was affirmed where contemporaneous medical reports made no mention of such an injury.
|
|||||
| Bryan v. State, CACR99-1463,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, September 20, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellants' convictions for robbery, theft, and third-degree battery were affirmed as supported by sufficient evidence.
|
|||||
| Cochran v. Cochran, CA 00-7,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, September 20, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Settlement agreement in divorce proceeding did not provide for an increase in wife's share of husband's pension based on any future stock splits or value increases. Declaratory judgment was affirmed.
|
|||||
| Fretueg v. White River Orthopaedic Clinic, CA 00-224,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, September 20, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellant failed to make a prima facie case that she was permanently and totally disabled due to a work-related shoulder injury. Appellant's medical limitations were not so restrictive as to render her services unmarketable.
|
|||||
| Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. Miles, CA 99-1043,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, September 20, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Even though employee suffered psoriasis flare-up that delayed recovery for compensable knee injury, award of workers' compensation benefits during delay affirmed because psoriasis was not independent intervening cause of disability.
|
|||||
| Hill v. Arkansas Dep't of Human Servs., CA 00-29,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, September 20, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The court affirmed the termination of appellant's parental rights; the trial court's finding of clear and convincing evidence was not clearly erroneous.
|
|||||
| Hill v. State, CACR 99-1495,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, September 20, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Introduction of tape-recorded statement to impeach one of appellant robber's witnesses was proper where appellant failed to timely object and where he suffered no prejudice.
|
|||||
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. |
