 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Acuff v. Superior Wheels, CA03-1242,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, June 16, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of benefits to the employee by the Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission was affirmed, because there was substantial evidence to show that the employee's injury was caused by a non-work related idiopathic fall.
|
|||||
| Adkins v. State, CACR03-426,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, June 16, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err by denying defendant's motion for new trial on the basis that the State improperly failed to disclose sexual abuse victims' medical records where the records were inadmissible pursuant to the psychotherapist-patient privilege.
|
|||||
| Anderson v. Mitts, CA 03-965,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, June 16, 2004, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a child was burned while in the aunt's care at the aunt's home, the proper standard of care for determining the parents' resulting claim was whether the aunt violated a duty of ordinary care to avoid injury to the child.
|
|||||
| Ballard v. Ballard, CA03-1271,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, June 16, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court did not clearly err in awarding custody of the parties' minor child to the mother, where, although both parties could provide an appropriate home, there was no compelling reason to remove the child from the custody of the mother.
|
|||||
| Beatty v. Haggard, CA 03-879,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISIONS THREE AND FOUR, June 16, 2004, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where evidence showed that sellers poured concrete next to their home's foundation as a repair for settling and that they failed to disclose the same to buyers, the buyers had a claim for constructive fraud against the sellers.
|
|||||
| Boulanger v. Lilburn, CA03-960,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, June 16, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In divorce action where husband violated property provision, because husband served jail time and purchased stocks for wife as ordered by trial court, he purged himself of contempt. On appeal, his challenges to propriety of contempt order were moot.
|
|||||
| Brooks v. Brooks, CA 03-793,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, June 16, 2004, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In mother's appeal of modification of visitation schedule, judgment was reversed; trial judge incorrectly held that the new "suggested visitation schedule" was a material change of circumstances.
|
|||||
| Buckley v. Pactiv Corp., CA 03-1337,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, June 16, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission properly denied a claimant's request for benefits, where her employer testified that she did not injure herself at work and the medical evidence failed to support a diagnosis of carpal-tunnel syndrome.
|
|||||
| Burks v. State, CACR03-1117,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, June 16, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a criminal appeal, defendant failed to preserve her claim that her conviction for DWI was not supported by substantial evidence. At trial, when defendant's motion for direct verdict was denied, she made no subsequent attempt to renew her motion.
|
|||||
| Camarillo-Cox v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., CA 03-861,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, June 16, 2004, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: DHS did not prove grounds to terminate parental rights by clear and convincing evidence, where, for five months between permanency hearing and termination hearing, mother showed significant improvement and met nearly all of case plan requirements.
|
|||||
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. |
