10 Arkansas opinions name it 2 courts 1959–2009 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Hightower v. Newark Public School Systemgreen2 sentences2009Hightower v. Newark Public School System, 57 Ark.App. 159 , 943 S.W.2d 608 (1997). 2009Hightower v. Newark Public School System, 57 Ark.App. 159 , 943 S.W.2d 608 (1997). | 1 | 5 |
Moncus v. Billingsley Logging & American Ins. Co.green2 sentences2007See Moncus v. Billingsley Logging, 366 Ark. 383 , 235 S.W.3d 877 (2006); Hightower, supra. Applying the current standard in Hightower, supra, we affirmed the Commission’s decision that the employee was not performing employment services when she slipped and fell on ice in the employer’s parking lot. 2007See Moncus v. Billingsley Logging, 366 Ark. 383 , 235 S.W.3d 877 (2006); Hightower, supra. Applying the current standard in Hightower, supra, we affirmed the Commission’s decision that the employee was not performing employment services when she slipped and fell on ice in the employer’s parking lot. | 1 | 1 |
Johannsen v. ACTION CONSTRUCTION CO. INC.green1 sentence1977See also Johannsen v. Action Const. Co., 119 N.W. 2d 826 (Minn. 1963). | 1 | 1 |
Bales, Admx. v. Service Club No. 1, Camp Chaffeegreen2 sentences1959See Bales v. Service Club No. 1, 208 Ark. 692 , 187 S. W. 2d 321 ; Youngdahl, Arkansas Workmen’s Compensation Act Interpretation — “Arising out of and in the Course of Employment, ’ ’ 11 Ark. 1959See Bales v. Service Club No. 1, 208 Ark. 692 , 187 S. W. 2d 321 ; Youngdahl, Arkansas Workmen’s Compensation Act Interpretation — “Arising out of and in the Course of Employment, ’ ’ 11 Ark. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arkansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Woodard v. White Spot Cafe
green
2 sentences2009Woodard v. White Spot Cafe, 30 Ark.App. 221 , 785 S.W.2d 54 (1990). 2009Woodard v. White Spot Cafe, 30 Ark.App. 221 , 785 S.W.2d 54 (1990). | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Wallace v. West Fraser South, Inc.
green
2 sentences2007Appellant also contends that this case is controlled by the decision in Wallace v. West Fraser South, Inc., 365 Ark. 68 , 225 S.W.3d 361 (2006), in which the supreme court reversed the denial of benefits when the employee was injured while returning from an authorized break. 2007Appellant also contends that this case is controlled by the decision in Wallace v. West Fraser South, Inc., 365 Ark. 68 , 225 S.W.3d 361 (2006), in which the supreme court reversed the denial of benefits when the employee was injured while returning from an authorized break. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Doctor's Business Service, Inc. v. Clark
green
1 sentence1995Id.; Doctor’s Business Service, Inc. v. Clark, 498 So.2d 659 (Fla. App. 1986); 1 A. Larson, The Law of Workmen’s Compensation, § 15.12(b) (1994). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Copeland v. Leaf, Inc.
green
1 sentence1995Copeland v. Leaf, Inc., 829 S.W.2d 140 (Tenn. 1992). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Davis v. Chemical Construction Co.
green
2 sentences1990While we agree with the appellant that this case falls within the premises exception to the going and coming rule, see Davis v. Chemical Construction Co., 232 Ark. 50 , 334 S.W.2d 697 (1960), we think that the appellant was nevertheless required to prove that his injury arose out of his employment. 1990While we agree with the appellant that this case falls within the premises exception to the going and coming rule, see Davis v. Chemical Construction Co., 232 Ark. 50 , 334 S.W.2d 697 (1960), we think that the appellant was nevertheless required to prove that his injury arose out of his employment. | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Johnson v. Clark
neutral
2 sentences1960This exception was discussed in Johnson v. Clark, 230 Ark. 275 , 322 S. W. 2d 72 , although there compensation was denied because the employee had actually left his employer’s premises. 1960This exception was discussed in Johnson v. Clark, 230 Ark. 275 , 322 S. W. 2d 72 , although there compensation was denied because the employee had actually left his employer’s premises. | 1 | 1960–1960 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.