 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Adams v. Adams, CA04-500,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, May 25, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial judge did not err in granting a divorce based on the uncontested allegations of general indignities and adultery; the appellate court could not review the disposition of the personal property, because the husband failed to include the parties' property agreement in the record on appeal pursuant to Ark. Sup. Ct. & Ct. App. R. 4-2.
|
|||||
| Bashaw v. State, CA04-897,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, May 25, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: On review of the order declaring appellants' social club to be a public nuisance, appellants abstracted witness testimony describing some of the exhibits in the case. Pursuant to Ark. Sup. Ct. & Ct. App. R. 4-2(a)(8), the appellate court ordered a rebriefing to allow appellants to provide copies of the exhibits themselves.
|
|||||
| Bradley v. State, CA CR 04-1149,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, May 25, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sufficient evidence supported trial court's revocation of defendant's suspended sentences on prior drug charges based on new offense involving sale of methamphetamine and drug paraphernalia possession because some of money from the controlled drug buy was found on defendant and his personal papers linked him to room where paraphernalia was found.
|
|||||
| Carlisle v. Watkins Motor Lines, Inc., CA04-982,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, May 25, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the records showed that the employee's symptoms were related to a ruptured disk that predated his injury, the Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission properly denied workers' compensation benefits. The employee failed to prove that his carpal-tunnel syndrome was causally related to his work under Ark. Code Ann. ¿ 11-9-102(4) (Supp. 2003).
|
|||||
| Harmon v. Kroger, CA04-869,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, May 25, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission articulated specific factors that led it to discount the employee's credibility; those factors were supported by the record when viewed in the light most favorable to the employer, and reasonable minds could have reached the same conclusion on the basis of those factors.
|
|||||
| Hoffman v. Hoffman, CA 04-1024,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, May 25, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial judge properly determined that the wife did not intentionally avoid means of income, especially where she was awarded many weeks of unemployment benefits and had sought federal disability benefits. Trial judge was not unmindful of the fact that the husband had greater family and financial obligations due to his remarriage.
|
|||||
| Long v. Glad Mfg. Co., CA04-1174,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, May 25, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The worker failed to cite to authority on appeal; therefore, the appellate court would not consider his claims of error. The worker failed to address his point that the Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission erred in finding that the evidence was not substantial to support his testimony.
|
|||||
| Sanyo Mfg. Corp. v. Forrest City Grocery Co., CA04-748,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, May 25, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court ruled that roads at issue were dedicated, thereby creating an easement in the public. Manufacturer failed to address matter of dedication in its post-trial brief and its argument that there was no evidence that roads had actually been dedicated came too late, having been made for the first time in its reply brief and at oral argument.
|
|||||
| Sparkman v. State, CA CR 04-268,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, May 25, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Even if a trial court violated Crawford and defendant's Confrontation Clause rights in admitting a videotaped interview of a four-year-old child, in which she described how defendant raped her, the error was harmless in view of defendant's admissions to sexual contact with the child and evidence of an injury to her hymen.
|
|||||
| Stevens v. State, CA CR 04-919,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, May 25, 2005, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where an officer stopped defendant's car in a car-wash stall and activated his blue lights, defendant was seized at the time the officer knocked on her window. The officer lacked any reasonable suspicion to detain defendant; thus, her Fourth Amendment rights were violated. The seizure of marijuana evidence was illegal.
|
|||||
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. |
