Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
11 Arkansas opinions name it 3 courts 1988–2026 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Arkansas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
McCambridge v. City of Little Rockgreen2 sentences2010Op. Att'y Gen. 95-262 , n. 2; see generally McCambridge v. City of Little Rock , 298 Ark. 219 , 766 S.W.2d 909 (1989) (recognizing that the constitutional right of privacy can supersede the specific disclosure requirement of the Arkansas FOIA). 2010Op. Att'y Gen. 95-262 , n. 2; see generally McCambridge v. City of Little Rock , 298 Ark. 219 , 766 S.W.2d 909 (1989) (recognizing that the constitutional right of privacy can supersede the specific disclosure requirement of the Arkansas FOIA). | 2 | 2 |
Watson v. Stategreen1 sentence2026See Watson v. State, 50 Ark. | 1 | 1 |
Locke v. Cookgreen2 sentences1998See, e.g., Locke v. Cook, 245 Ark. 787, 793 , 434 S.W.2d 598, 601 (1968) (stating that the statute should be construed so that no word is left void, superfluous, or insignificant; and meaning and effect must be given to every word in the statute if possible). 1998See, e.g., Locke v. Cook, 245 Ark. 787, 793 , 434 S.W.2d 598, 601 (1968) (stating that the statute should be construed so that no word is left void, superfluous, or insignificant; and meaning and effect must be given to every word in the statute if possible). | 1 | 1 |
O'HARTIGAN v. Department of Personnelgreen2 sentences1993See O'Hartigan v. State Dept. of Personnel, 118 Wash. 2d 111 , 821 P.2d 44 (1991). 1993See O'Hartigan v. State Dept. of Personnel, 118 Wash. 2d 111 , 821 P.2d 44 (1991). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Rider Oldsmobile, Inc. v. Wrightgreen2 sentences1988But cf. Rider Oldsmobile, Inc. v. Wright, 415 F.Supp. 258 (M.D. 1988But cf. Rider Oldsmobile, Inc. v. Wright, 415 F.Supp. 258 (M.D.Penn.1976). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Grice v. Atkinson
green
2 sentences2003In Eady v. Lansford, 351 Ark. 249 , 92 S.W.3d 57 (2002), and Grice v. Atkinson, 308 Ark. 637 , 826 S.W.2d 810 (1992), the supreme court reaffirmed Fuller in upholding the decisions of trial courts to direct a verdict in favor of the medical providers where the patient's expert witness merely stated in a conclusory fashion that the information that the doctors had provided the patient in order to obtain consent for surgery was inadequate. 2003In Eady v. Lansford, 351 Ark. 249 , 92 S.W.3d 57 (2002), and Grice v. Atkinson, 308 Ark. 637 , 826 S.W.2d 810 (1992), the supreme court reaffirmed Fuller in upholding the decisions of trial courts to direct a verdict in favor of the medical providers where the patient's expert witness merely stated in a conclusory fashion that the information that the doctors had provided the patient in order to obtain consent for surgery was inadequate. | 2 | 1995–2003 |
Snyder v. Martin
green
2 sentences2016Snyder v. Martin, 305 Ark. 128 , 806 S.W.2d 358 (1991). 2016Snyder v. Martin, 305 Ark. 128 , 806 S.W.2d 358 (1991). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Peel v. Attorney Registration & Disciplinary Commission of Illinois
green
2 sentences2011The court addressed the issue as being whether the use of that title constituted "commercial speech" under the relevant constitutional standard. 1 The court concluded that the Florida statute constituted "an absolute prohibition on potentially misleading but truthful speech." 2 In concluding that the statute was not sufficiently narrowly tailored to avoid possible deception, the court observed: However, narrower limits, such as a disclosure requirement would allow the speech and ensure that it is presented in a non-misleading manner. [Citations omitted.] Disclosure that a person's Ph.D, or cla 2011Based upon the Court's reasoning in Peel , the Strang court concluded that, in order to inform the public of a state-law restriction on licensing or certification, "[a] state may consider `requiring a disclaimer about the certifying organizations or the standards of a specialty.' Peel , 496 U.S. at 110 . . . ." 4 Nevertheless, the court in Strang distinguished Peel as follows: Plaintiff relies on Peel to argue that the speech is not potentially misleading, but such reliance is misplaced. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Eady v. Lansford
green
2 sentences2003In Eady v. Lansford, 351 Ark. 249 , 92 S.W.3d 57 (2002), and Grice v. Atkinson, 308 Ark. 637 , 826 S.W.2d 810 (1992), the supreme court reaffirmed Fuller in upholding the decisions of trial courts to direct a verdict in favor of the medical providers where the patient's expert witness merely stated in a conclusory fashion that the information that the doctors had provided the patient in order to obtain consent for surgery was inadequate. 2003In Eady v. Lansford, 351 Ark. 249 , 92 S.W.3d 57 (2002), and Grice v. Atkinson, 308 Ark. 637 , 826 S.W.2d 810 (1992), the supreme court reaffirmed Fuller in upholding the decisions of trial courts to direct a verdict in favor of the medical providers where the patient's expert witness merely stated in a conclusory fashion that the information that the doctors had provided the patient in order to obtain consent for surgery was inadequate. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Bates v. City of Little Rock
green
1 sentence2001Bates v. Little Rock, 361 U.S. 516 (1960). | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Morris v. Spencer
green
1 sentence1995Twelve years later, in Grice v. Atkinson, 308 Ark. 637 , 826 S.W.2d 10 (1992), we reaffirmed our position in Fuller in upholding the trial court’s decision to direct a verdict in favor of a dentist where the patient’s expert witness merely stated in a conclusory fashion that the information that the dentist had provided the patient in order to obtain her consent for oral surgery was inadequate. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Fuller v. Starnes
green
1 sentence1995In so holding, we stated that the disclosure standard “always requires expert medical testimony for the jury to determine whether a physician’s failure to disclose constitutes a breach of his duty to disclose.” Id. at 479 . | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.