 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Abramson v. Eldridge, 03-450,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 22, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Writ of certiorari was granted to appellee, where the court would review the correctness of the attorney fees. Notice of appeal was filed timely for December 30, 2002, order regarding attorney fees, but not to the December 16, 2002, order.
|
|||||
| Bank of Am., N.A. v. C.D. Smith Motor Co., 02-632,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 22, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence of 20 years of dealings between a bank that provided recourse financing for a car dealer was admissible to show a course of dealing between them in the dealer's breach of contract action, where such did not vary the contract's terms.
|
|||||
| Copeland v. State, CR 03-180,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 22, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Durham v. Putman, CR 02-1028,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 22, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Faulkens v. State, CR 01-907,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 22, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant did specify what postconviction remedy was available to him, defendant did not meet his burden of demonstrating that he was entitled to a copy of the record filed in his postconviction appeal.
|
|||||
| Finagin v. Ark. Dev. Fin. Auth., 02-1197,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 22, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Ford Motor Co. v. Harper, 01-1286,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 22, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Car company and dealership's appeal was from interlocutory order concerning discovery matter; thus, appellate court lacked jurisdiction to consider the interlocutory appeal, and it did not reach the issue of whether the documents were privileged.
|
|||||
| Gates v. State, CR 02-432,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 22, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court did not have subject matter jurisdiction to modify defendant's original executed sentence when it entered an additional suspended sentence and later revoked the suspension of that sentence and imprisoned defendant.
|
|||||
| Grillot v. State, CR 01-792,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 22, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's motion for directed verdict was only to a capital-murder charge, not the lesser-included charges, so defendant's challenge to the insufficient of the evidence was not preserved for appeal.
|
|||||
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. |
