 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Braswell v. State, CACR04-832,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, June 1, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. ¿ 5-4-401(a)(1), defendant's fifty-year sentence was illegal because it exceeded the statutory maximum for a Class Y felony, which was forty years; trial court clearly based revocation solely on violations of the suspended sentence that was imposed for the Class Y felony, not the separate charges in two separate cases.
|
|||||
| Crawford County v. Jones, CA04-469,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, June 1, 2005, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in granting a directed verdict for the county as to former employee's claim under the Arkansas Whistle-Blower Act because the employee had reported alleged misconduct to the quorum court, which was an "appropriate authority" under the Act, and election of remedies doctrine did not limit number of causes of action she could assert.
|
|||||
| Cummings v. State, CA04-1082,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, June 1, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a juvenile did not raise his argument to the trial court that the evidence was insufficient to prove that he caused damage with a B.B. gun in an amount exceeding $ 1,000, which was the monetary threshold to support the Class A misdemeanor of criminal mischief in the second degree, the argument was not preserved for appellate review.
|
|||||
| Deer v. City of Prescott, CA05-73,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, June 1, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission properly denied employee's claim for enhanced workers' compensation benefits under Ark. Code Ann. ¿ 11-9-505(a)(1) (2002) because Commission had before it evidence that employer had no jobs available that matched employee's physical limitations; employee did not show that suitable employment was available.
|
|||||
| Hamm v. State, CA CR 04-1014,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, June 1, 2005, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pursuant to Ark. R. Evid. 404(b), witness testimony about defendant's prior conduct was improperly admitted as it was evidence of another act that was admitted to prove the character of defendant in order to show that he acted in conformity therewith. Transcripts of investigator's interview with the victim were properly admitted into evidence.
|
|||||
| Home Care Professionals of Ark., Inc. v. Dir., Ark. Empl. Sec. Dep't , E04-280,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, June 1, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In home care company's appeal of order that determined that remunerated services of its caregivers using it as source of referrals qualified as employment subject to payment of unemployment insurance taxes, court found that it was necessary to remand case to Arkansas Board of Review because Board's opinion did not make sufficient specific findings.
|
|||||
| Horner Enters. v. Allen, CA04-1392,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, June 1, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Substantial evidence supported the Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission's finding that an employee's back problems were casually related to her compensable low-back injury where the employee suffered a recurrence, another period of incapacitation resulting from a previous injury.
|
|||||
| Lane v. Sebourn, CA 04-1030,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, June 1, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court properly found that the mother made valid inter vivos gifts of real and personal property to her daughter where there was evidence that the daughter had not taken advantage of the mother and that the mother was not under the daughter's dominance and undue influence at the time the mother made the transfers to the daughter.
|
|||||
| Martindill v. Stanton, CA04-8,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, June 1, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment was properly granted in favor of the business owner where the patron or his predecessors could have litigated claims in the original chancery action; the patron did not explain how he or the original plaintiffs were prohibited from asserting their claim in the earlier action.
|
|||||
| McDonald v. State, CACR04-1130,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, June 1, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Substantial evidence supported defendant's conviction for aggravated robbery where defendant concealed packages of steak on his person and the actual removal of the steaks from the store was not necessary to establish the offense of theft; witnesses testified that defendant was observed putting steaks into the lining of his jacket.
|
|||||
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. |
