10 Arkansas opinions name it 2 courts 1927–2015 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 |
|---|---|---|
Taggart v. Mooregreen2 sentences1989In Benedict v. Arbor Acres Farm, Inc., 265 Ark. 574, 577 , 579 S.W.2d 605, 607 (1979), we wrote: The law of res judicata provides that a prior decree bars a subsequent suit when the subsequent cause involves the same subject matters as that determined or which could have been determined in the former suit between the same parties; the bar extends to those questions of law and fact which “might [well] have been but were not presented.” In Taggart v. Moore, 292 Ark. 168, 171 , 729 S.W.2d 7, 9 (1987) (citations omitted), we wrote: One of the main purposes of the doctrine of res judicata is to put 1989In Benedict v. Arbor Acres Farm, Inc., 265 Ark. 574, 577 , 579 S.W.2d 605, 607 (1979), we wrote: The law of res judicata provides that a prior decree bars a subsequent suit when the subsequent cause involves the same subject matters as that determined or which could have been determined in the former suit between the same parties; the bar extends to those questions of law and fact which “might [well] have been but were not presented.” In Taggart v. Moore, 292 Ark. 168, 171 , 729 S.W.2d 7, 9 (1987) (citations omitted), we wrote: One of the main purposes of the doctrine of res judicata is to put | 2 | 3 |
Benedict v. Arbor Acres Farm, Inc.green2 sentences1989In Benedict v. Arbor Acres Farm, Inc., 265 Ark. 574, 577 , 579 S.W.2d 605, 607 (1979), we wrote: The law of res judicata provides that a prior decree bars a subsequent suit when the subsequent cause involves the same subject matters as that determined or which could have been determined in the former suit between the same parties; the bar extends to those questions of law and fact which “might [well] have been but were not presented.” In Taggart v. Moore, 292 Ark. 168, 171 , 729 S.W.2d 7, 9 (1987) (citations omitted), we wrote: One of the main purposes of the doctrine of res judicata is to put 1989In Benedict v. Arbor Acres Farm, Inc., 265 Ark. 574, 577 , 579 S.W.2d 605, 607 (1979), we wrote: The law of res judicata provides that a prior decree bars a subsequent suit when the subsequent cause involves the same subject matters as that determined or which could have been determined in the former suit between the same parties; the bar extends to those questions of law and fact which “might [well] have been but were not presented.” In Taggart v. Moore, 292 Ark. 168, 171 , 729 S.W.2d 7, 9 (1987) (citations omitted), we wrote: One of the main purposes of the doctrine of res judicata is to put | 2 | 2 |
State v. Russellgreen2 sentences1998Id. at 99-100, 722 S.W.2d at 832 . 1998Id. at 99-100, 722 S.W.2d at 832 . | 1 | 1 |
Ashby v. Stategreen2 sentences1996See Ashby v. State, 297 Ark. 315 , 761 S.W.2d 912 (1988). 1996See Ashby v. State, 297 Ark. 315 , 761 S.W.2d 912 (1988). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arkansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Madison HMA, Inc. v. St. Dominic-Jackson Memorial Hospital
green
2 sentences2015Dominic-Jackson Memorial Hospital, 35 So. 3d 1209 (Miss. 2010), clarified its standard of review and stated that its Rule 24, its comment, and the underlying purposes of the rule clearly demonstrated that a de novo standard of review applied to all intervention-of-right judgments, as the abuse-of-discretion standard deviated greatly from the court’s historical de novo review of questions of law. 2015Dominic-Jackson Memorial Hospital, 35 So.3d 1209 (Miss.2010), clarified its standard of review and stated that its Rule 24, its comment, and the underlying purposes of the rule clearly demonstrated that a de novo standard of review applied to all intervention-of-right judgments, as the abuse-of-discretion standard deviated greatly from the court’s historical de novo review of questions of law. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Noble v. State
green
1 sentence2015Moreover, the majority fails to cite any authority for the proposition that the filing of the transcript for Noble’s interim collateral attacks—which were not cases directly 10 Cite as 2015 Ark. 141 reviewing his original guilty plea—established jurisdiction in this court for the purposes of his error coram nobis petition. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Bankston v. McKenzie
green
2 sentences2001Bankston v. McKenzie, 288 Ark. 65 , 702 S.W.2d 14 (1986). 2001Bankston v. McKenzie, 288 Ark. 65 , 702 S.W.2d 14 (1986). | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Jackson v. State
green
2 sentences1998Id. at 99-100, 722 S.W.2d at 832 . 1998Id. at 99-100, 722 S.W.2d at 832 . | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Hink v. Board of Directors of Beaver Water District
green
2 sentences1984Appellants cite Hink v. Board of Directors of Beaver Water District, 235 Ark. 107 , 357 S.W.2d 271 (1962) for the proposition that Act 114 was adopted to allow the use of water in federally owned lakes only for municipal and industrial use. 1984Appellants cite Hink v. Board of Directors of Beaver Water District, 235 Ark. 107 , 357 S.W.2d 271 (1962) for the proposition that Act 114 was adopted to allow the use of water in federally owned lakes only for municipal and industrial use. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Brooks v. International Shoe Co.
neutral
2 sentences1927In Terry v. Klein, 133 Ark. 366 , 201 S. W. 801 , it was said: “Conceding that the words ‘just and true account’ mean, as ordinarily construed, an itemized account (Brooks v. International Shoe Co., 132 Ark. 386 , 200 S. W. 1027 ), this court has decided that failure to itemize the account does not defeat the lien. 1927In Terry v. Klein, 133 Ark. 366 , 201 S. W. 801 , it was said: “Conceding that the words ‘just and true account’ mean, as ordinarily construed, an itemized account (Brooks v. International Shoe Co., 132 Ark. 386 , 200 S. W. 1027 ), this court has decided that failure to itemize the account does not defeat the lien. | 1 | 1927–1927 |
Terry v. Klein
neutral
2 sentences1927In Terry v. Klein, 133 Ark. 366 , 201 S. W. 801 , it was said: “Conceding that the words ‘just and true account’ mean, as ordinarily construed, an itemized account (Brooks v. International Shoe Co., 132 Ark. 386 , 200 S. W. 1027 ), this court has decided that failure to itemize the account does not defeat the lien. 1927In Terry v. Klein, 133 Ark. 366 , 201 S. W. 801 , it was said: “Conceding that the words ‘just and true account’ mean, as ordinarily construed, an itemized account (Brooks v. International Shoe Co., 132 Ark. 386 , 200 S. W. 1027 ), this court has decided that failure to itemize the account does not defeat the lien. | 1 | 1927–1927 |
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.