event violation (Arkansas) · Go Syfert
← Arkansas issues

event violation in Arkansas

8 Arkansas opinions name it 3 courts 1983–2016 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.

Followed or applied (4)

CaseFollowedCited
Thompson v. Stategreen
ark · 2016 · cited in 1 Arkansas opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016
1 sentence

2016See, Fitzhugh v. State, 296 Ark. 12 Cite as 2016 Ark. 383 137, 752 S.W.2d 275 (1988) (reversing and remanding following a determination that the failure to notify an attorney that a charge of contempt was pending against him and to inform him of the specific nature of the charge violated the attorney’s right to due process).

11
Fitzhugh v. Stategreen
ark · 1988 · cited in 1 Arkansas opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016
2 sentences

2016See, Fitzhugh v. State, 296 Ark. 12 Cite as 2016 Ark. 383 137, 752 S.W.2d 275 (1988) (reversing and remanding following a determination that the failure to notify an attorney that a charge of contempt was pending against him and to inform him of the specific nature of the charge violated the attorney’s right to due process).

2016See, Fitzhugh v. State, 296 Ark. 137 , 752 S.W.2d 275 (1988) (reversing and remanding following a determination that the failure to notify an attorney that a charge of contempt was pending against him and to inform him of the specific nature of the charge violated the attorney’s right to due process).

11
Fuqua v. Flowersgreen
ark · 2000 · cited in 1 Arkansas opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015
2 sentences

2015See Fuqua, 341 Ark. 901 , 20 S.W.3d 388 .

2015See Fuqua, 341 Ark. 901 , 20 S.W.3d 388 .

11
Forrest City MacHine Works, Inc. v. Aderhold Ex Rel. Cross County Bankgreen
ark · 1981 · cited in 1 Arkansas opinions naming this issue, 1992–1992
2 sentences

1992See generally Forrest City Machine Works v. Aderhold, 273 Ark. 33 , 616 S.W.2d 720 (1981).

1992See generally Forrest City Machine Works v. Aderhold, 273 Ark. 33 , 616 S.W.2d 720 (1981).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arkansas. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (4)

CaseCitedYears
Franks v. Delaware green
scotus · 1978
2 sentences

2000In the event that at the hearing the allegation of pegury or reckless disregard is established by the defendant by a preponderance of the evidence, and, with the affidavit’s false material set to one side, the affidavit’s remaining content is insufficient to establish probable cause, the search warrant must be voided and the fruits of the search excluded to the same extent as if probable cause was lacking on the face of the affidavit. 438 U.S. at 155-56 .

1999Id.

21999–2000
Weiss v. McLemore green
ark · 2007
1 sentence

2013Id.

12013–2013
Saforo & Associates, Inc. v. Porocel Corp. green
ark · 1999
2 sentences

2001Our legislature did not define “actual loss.” In Saforo & Associates, Inc. v. Porocel Corp., 337 Ark. 553 , 991 S.W.2d 117 (1999), the Arkansas Supreme Court addressed for the first time the calculation of damages in the trade-secret context.

2001Our legislature did not define “actual loss.” In Saforo & Associates, Inc. v. Porocel Corp., 337 Ark. 553 , 991 S.W.2d 117 (1999), the Arkansas Supreme Court addressed for the first time the calculation of damages in the trade-secret context.

12001–2001
Brown v. State green
ark · 1978
2 sentences

1983The holding in Franks v. Delaware was applied by the Arkansas Supreme Court in Brown v. State, 264 Ark. 248 , 570 S.W.2d 251 (1978).

1983The holding in Franks v. Delaware was applied by the Arkansas Supreme Court in Brown v. State, 264 Ark. 248 , 570 S.W.2d 251 (1978).

11983–1983

Where else courts name it

CA 84 (1919–2025) TX 62 (1932–2021) NY 60 (1879–2026) PA 54 (1921–2024) IL 35 (1934–2026) OH 32 (1991–2025) NC 26 (1956–2022) GA 23 (1911–2025) LA 23 (1908–2020) MA 23 (1933–2025) AL 21 (1921–2017) FL 21 (1971–2024) MD 20 (1935–2026) WI 20 (1935–2025) VA 19 (1924–2024) MO 17 (1901–2025) MI 17 (1912–2021) NJ 17 (1947–2026) TN 16 (1976–2026) CT 16 (1929–2026) SC 14 (1969–2024) KS 13 (1978–2022) MS 13 (1956–2009) WA 11 (1947–2024) VT 11 (1966–2021) IA 11 (1962–2023) ND 10 (1983–2013) KY 9 (1933–2025) IN 9 (1987–2025) OK 9 (1954–2015) AZ 9 (1985–2025) CO 8 (1975–2025) DE 8 (1974–2019) AR 8 (1983–2016) OR 7 (1935–2013) NM 6 (1919–2020) NE 6 (1964–2023) ID 6 (1984–2009) WY 6 (1998–2026) RI 5 (1976–2023) DC 5 (1992–2011) MT 5 (1976–2018) AK 5 (1975–2003) HI 4 (1983–2008) SD 4 (1978–2024) ME 4 (2003–2019) NH 3 (1992–2021) WV 3 (1995–2018) UT 3 (1987–2018) PR 2 (1963–1986) NV 2 (1961–2001)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check