 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Patchell v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., CA 03-1087,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, May 19, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: There was no proof that the former employee's work-related-injury did not warrant further treatment. Thus, workers' compensation commission erred when it denied her continued medical treatment for a chronic-pain condition resulting from her injury.
|
|||||
| Price v. State, CACR03-658,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, May 19, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court affirmed denial of defendant's motion to suppress even though an incorrect address was on the search warrant as officer had watched controlled buy at defendant's house and was the one to execute the warrant.
|
|||||
| Roberts v. State, CACR02-830,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, May 19, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant was tried for delivery of a controlled substance more than two years after his arrest and the State was unable to explain or justify the delay, prosecution of defendant on that charge was absolutely barred.
|
|||||
| Smith v. Great Lakes Chem. Corp., CA 03-945,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, May 19, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A Workers' Compensation Commission decision rejecting the testimony of doctors who supported an employee's claim of constant back pain from an accident in favor of other doctors who noted degenerative changes was supported by substantial 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. |
