 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Lee v. Pepper Bottling Co., CA 00-1088,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISIONS THREE AND FOUR, May 30, 2001, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Workers' compensation benefits properly denied where appellant failed to meet burden of proving injury was the result of a specific event, identifiable in time and place of occurrence, arising out of his employment.
|
|||||
| Lewis v. State, CA CR 00-1031,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, May 30, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in allowing hearsay to be admitted under excited utterance exception as child's statement about sexual abuse to mother the day after it occurred was not spontaneous, excited, or impulsive, but error in admitting it was harmless.
|
|||||
| Mitchener Excavation v. McAfee, CA00-1090,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, May 30, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in finding a contract between a contractor and subcontractor to not be ambiguous and in construing the plain meaning of the contract, or in denying the contractor's motion for a continuance.
|
|||||
| Romo v. Romo, CA 00-957,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, May 30, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Modification of visitation rights appropriate where appellee presented sufficient change in circumstances regarding visitation and modification was in the children's best interest.
|
|||||
| Spencer v. State, CACR00-826,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, May 30, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not abuse discretion finding proper chain of custody and admitting alleged drugs and firearm into evidence. State was not required to show every possibility of tampering was eliminated, but that evidence was genuine.
|
|||||
| Stevens v. State, CACR00-1319,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, May 30, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Search warrant affidavit demonstrated substantial basis for concluding probable cause existed to issue warrant; therefore, trial court did not err by denying motion to suppress drug evidence seized following execution.
|
|||||
| Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Thurman, CA 00-1108,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, May 30, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Workers' compensation commission's finding of compensable back injury was supported by substantial evidence, even in light of conflicting lay and medical evidence regarding the nature and causation of appellee's injury.
|
|||||
| Womble v. Gray, CA00-1016,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, May 30, 2001, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Chancellor's denial of award of specific performance or constructive trust to a party who claimed a landowner reneged on a promise to convey property to her was not clearly erroneous based on the facts.
|
|||||
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. |
