 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| All-Tech Mach. & Tool, Inc. v. Simmons Foods, Inc., No. CA 06-1152,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, May 30, 2007, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where an insurer settled a plant owner's claim due to a fire, directed verdict on the insured's negligence and breach of contract claims against the insurer was proper because there was no causal connection between the insurer's negligence in handling the claim, if any, and the increase in the insured's premiums; insured's award of fees was upheld.
|
|||||
| Atl. Research Corp. v. Brown, CA06-1341,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, May 30, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Workers' compensation benefits were properly awarded to an estate after employee had fatal heart attack while mowing grass for employer where estate proved that employee's work activity was major cause, as defined in Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-102(14)(A), of heart attack under Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-114; predisposing factors were evidence to be assessed.
|
|||||
| Barber v. State, CACR06-1020,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, May 30, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a manslaughter case, the court properly rejected defendant's proposed justification jury instruction because, although defendant might have been justified in using deadly force against the victim under the circumstances, the term "accomplice" was too broad under Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-403, and the proffered instruction was therefore incorrect.
|
|||||
| Benitez v. State, No. CACR05-1293,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, May 30, 2007, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sufficient evidence supported conviction of possession of controlled substances with intent to deliver because appellant's perfectly timed flight when officers pried open false compartment in vehicle in which appellant was occupant was sufficiently compelling to show that he knew drugs were hidden in false compartment, and established possession.
|
|||||
| Beverlin v. Ark. HHS, CA06-1026, CA07-39,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, May 30, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Even though a child was residing elsewhere, the evidence was still sufficient to support a finding that the child was dependent/neglected under Ark. Code Ann. § 9-27-303(18)(A), (36)(A) because this child did not have to incur the same injuries as the ones living in the residence; the parents did not challenge the findings as to those children.
|
|||||
| Coleman v. State, CACR06-1214,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, May 30, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's convictions for aggravated robbery, kidnapping, theft of property, and residential burglary were supported by evidence where there were two in-court identifications of him; in both instances, the victims testified with confidence that he was one who broke into their home. Defendant admitted to being in vicinity in which crimes occurred.
|
|||||
| Denton v. Williams, CA06-1091,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, May 30, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a landlord failed to establish any negligence attributable to a tenant - either directly or via res ipsa loquitur - a court properly granted summary judgment to the tenant; for eight hours preceding the fire, the car was out of the tenant's exclusive control, and the evidence merely showed that a fire of unknown cause occurred.
|
|||||
| Gadwall Prods., Inc. v. Fletcher, CA06-1265,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, May 30, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In dispute arising over contract to promote and sell personal care products, trial court properly ruled for appellees and awarded damages because appellant's inability or unwillingness to perform constituted material breach and, but for breach, appellees would have received 7.5% of products' net sales and no less than $350,000 over first two years.
|
|||||
| Glenn Mech., Inc. v. Gibney, CA06-1169,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, May 30, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Breach of contract claim's dismissal as time barred by Ark. Code Ann. § 16-56-105(1), statute of limitations applicable to oral agreement between contractor and home owner, was affirmed because, based on evidence, trial court's resolution of disputed fact as to when contractor received last payment on home owner's account was not clearly erroneous.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
