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.
10 Arkansas opinions name it 2 courts 1961–2024 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 |
|---|---|---|
Morris v. Stategreen2 sentences2020Morris v. State, 351 Ark. 426, 432 , 94 S.W.3d 913, 917 (2003). 2020Morris v. State, 351 Ark. 426, 432 , 94 S.W.3d 913, 917 (2003). | 2 | 2 |
Williamson v. Sanofi Winthrop Pharmaceuticals, Inc.green2 sentences2008Williamson v. Sanofi Winthrop Pharms., Inc., 347 Ark. 89, 96 , 60 S.W.3d 428, 432 (2001) (quoting Herbert B. 2008Williamson v. Sanofi Winthrop Pharms., Inc., 347 Ark. 89, 96 , 60 S.W.3d 428, 432 (2001) (quoting Herbert B. | 1 | 2 |
Dixon v. Ledbettergreen2 sentences2007“The test stated in the rule is whether the expert’s reliance is reasonable.” Collins, 327 Ark. at 165 , 937 S.W.2d at 165 ; Dixon v. Ledbetter, 262 Ark. 758, 762 , 561 S.W.2d 294, 296 (1978). 2007“The test stated in the rule is whether the expert’s reliance is reasonable.” Collins, 327 Ark. at 165 , 937 S.W.2d at 165 ; Dixon v. Ledbetter, 262 Ark. 758, 762 , 561 S.W.2d 294, 296 (1978). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arkansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
SIMPSON HOUSING SOLUTIONS, LLC. v. Hernandez
green
2 sentences2024Simpson Housing Sols., LLC v. Hernandez, 2009 Ark. 480 , 347 S.W.3d 1 . 2024Simpson Housing Sols., LLC v. Hernandez, 2009 Ark. 480 , 347 S.W.3d 1 . | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Carquest of Hot Springs, Inc. v. General Parts, Inc.
green
1 sentence2012Id. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Collins v. Hinton
green
2 sentences2007“The test stated in the rule is whether the expert’s reliance is reasonable.” Collins, 327 Ark. at 165 , 937 S.W.2d at 165 ; Dixon v. Ledbetter, 262 Ark. 758, 762 , 561 S.W.2d 294, 296 (1978). 2007“The test stated in the rule is whether the expert’s reliance is reasonable.” Collins, 327 Ark. at 165 , 937 S.W.2d at 165 ; Dixon v. Ledbetter, 262 Ark. 758, 762 , 561 S.W.2d 294, 296 (1978). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Inman v. Inman
green
2 sentences1987In doing so, the court discussed the case of Inman v. Inman, 578 S.W.2d 266 (Ky.Ct.App.1979), which set out the test or factors that had to be met before a spouse's increased earning power, represented by a professional degree or license, could be counted as marital property. [1] The test was three-fold: (1) there was no accumulated marital property; (2) the spouse who subsidized the degree is ineligible for maintenance; and (3) the court had to consider the extent to which the non-license holder had already or otherwise benefitted financially from his or her spouse's earning capacity. 1987In doing so, the court discussed the case of Inman v. Inman, 578 S.W.2d 266 (Ky. Ct. App. 1979), which set out the test or factors that had to be met before a spouse’s increased earning power, represented by a professional degree or license, could be counted as marital property. 1 The test was three-fold: (1) there was no accumulated marital property; (2) the spouse who subsidized the degree is ineligible for maintenance; and (3) the court had to consider the extent to which the non-license holder had already or otherwise benefitted financially from his or her spouse’s earning capacity. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Schuman v. Certain Lands
green
2 sentences1962Not only have we failed to find such evidence but also we find virtually an absence of proof as to fraud, adverse possession of the mineral interest, Schuman v. Certain Lands, 223 Ark. 85 , 264 S. W. 2d 413 ; Jones v. Brown, 211 Ark. 164 , 199 S. W. 2d 973 , and lack of consideration. 1962Not only have we failed to find such evidence but also we find virtually an absence of proof as to fraud, adverse possession of the mineral interest, Schuman v. Certain Lands, 223 Ark. 85 , 264 S. W. 2d 413 ; Jones v. Brown, 211 Ark. 164 , 199 S. W. 2d 973 , and lack of consideration. | 1 | 1962–1962 |
Jones v. Brown
green
2 sentences1962Not only have we failed to find such evidence but also we find virtually an absence of proof as to fraud, adverse possession of the mineral interest, Schuman v. Certain Lands, 223 Ark. 85 , 264 S. W. 2d 413 ; Jones v. Brown, 211 Ark. 164 , 199 S. W. 2d 973 , and lack of consideration. 1962Not only have we failed to find such evidence but also we find virtually an absence of proof as to fraud, adverse possession of the mineral interest, Schuman v. Certain Lands, 223 Ark. 85 , 264 S. W. 2d 413 ; Jones v. Brown, 211 Ark. 164 , 199 S. W. 2d 973 , and lack of consideration. | 1 | 1962–1962 |
Arkansas State Highway Commission v. Byars
green
2 sentences1961The above goes to the questions of the before and after damages. . . .” Certainly it was proper for appellant to offer evidence as to the “before and after” value of the land, but as here correctly recognized by the attorney for appellant in his objection to the ruling of the court, the statement by a witness of naked figures alone will not meet the test of the rule laid down in State Highway Commission v. Byars, 221 Ark. 845 , 256 S. W. 2d 738 , wherein it was held that a mere statement of the before and after value without stating and taking into consideration the related factors upon which 1961The above goes to the questions of the before and after damages. . . .” Certainly it was proper for appellant to offer evidence as to the “before and after” value of the land, but as here correctly recognized by the attorney for appellant in his objection to the ruling of the court, the statement by a witness of naked figures alone will not meet the test of the rule laid down in State Highway Commission v. Byars, 221 Ark. 845 , 256 S. W. 2d 738 , wherein it was held that a mere statement of the before and after value without stating and taking into consideration the related factors upon which | 1 | 1961–1961 |
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.