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.
6 Arkansas opinions name it 2 courts 1946–2007 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 |
|---|---|---|
Ferguson v. Greengreen2 sentences1991But in Ferguson v. Green, 266 Ark. 556 , 587 S.W.2d 18 (1979), the court reviewed cases relating to remand of chancery cases for further proof and then held: Where a judgment [or decree] is reversed for error in the proceedings in the court below and remanded for proceedings according to law and not inconsistent with the opinion of the court, it is always understood that the proceedings in the court below, prior to the fault or error which is ascertained by this court to exist, are in no wise reversed or vacated by the adjudication of the appellate court, but the fault or error adjudicated is 1991But in Ferguson v. Green, 266 Ark. 556 , 587 S.W.2d 18 (1979), the court reviewed cases relating to remand of chancery cases for further proof and then held: Where a judgment [or decree] is reversed for error in the proceedings in the court below and remanded for proceedings according to law and not inconsistent with the opinion of the court, it is always understood that the proceedings in the court below, prior to the fault or error which is ascertained by this court to exist, are in no wise reversed or vacated by the adjudication of the appellate court, but the fault or error adjudicated is | 1 | 2 |
County of Sacramento v. Lewisred1 sentence2007This approach appears to be consistent with County of Sacramento v. Lewis, 523 U.S. 833, 850 (1998), in which the U.S. Supreme Court said: “Since it may suffice for Eighth Amendment liability that prison officials were deliberately indifferent to the medical needs of their prisoners, ... it follows that such deliberately indifferent conduct must also be enough to satisfy the fault requirement for due process claims based on the medical needs of someone jailed while awaiting trial.” This leads us to a preliminary question that this court must answer before addressing the certified question, and | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arkansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
KARK-TV v. Simon
green
2 sentences1985We do not consider whether the fault requirement accorded media defendants in Gertz v. Robert Welch, 418 U.S. 323 (1974) and KARK-TV v. Simon and Smith, 280 Ark. 228 , 656 S.W.2d 702 (1983), should be applied to nonmedia defendants, as our holding is not dependent on that point. 1985We do not consider whether the fault requirement accorded media defendants in Gertz v. Robert Welch, 418 U.S. 323 (1974) and KARK-TV v. Simon and Smith, 280 Ark. 228 , 656 S.W.2d 702 (1983), should be applied to nonmedia defendants, as our holding is not dependent on that point. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.
green
1 sentence1985We do not consider whether the fault requirement accorded media defendants in Gertz v. Robert Welch, 418 U.S. 323 (1974) and KARK-TV v. Simon and Smith, 280 Ark. 228 , 656 S.W.2d 702 (1983), should be applied to nonmedia defendants, as our holding is not dependent on that point. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Fortenberry v. Frazier
green
1 sentence1979Fortenberry v. Frazier, supra. Where a judgment [or decree] is reversed for error in the proceedings in the court below and remanded for proceedings according to law and not inconsistent with the opinion of the court, it is always understood that the proceedings in the court below, prior to the fault or error which is ascertained by this court to exist, are in no wise reversed or vacated by the adjudication of the appellate court, but the fault or error adjudicated is the point from which the cause is to progress anew. | 1 | 1979–1979 |
Cotton v. White
green
2 sentences1946The general rule in ejectment cases is that the plaintiff must recover on the strength of his own title, but in Cotton v. White, 131 Ark. 273 , 199 S. W. 116 , we stated: “While it is a general rule that a plaintiff in ejectment must recover upon the strength of his own title, and not upon the weakness of his adversary’s, this rule has no application where the defendant is a mere trespasser invading the actual possession of plaintiff, in which case plaintiff can recover on prior peaceable possession alone. 15 Cyc. 22; Green v. Jordan, 83 Ala. 220 , 3 So. 513 , 3 Am. 1946The general rule in ejectment cases is that the plaintiff must recover on the strength of his own title, but in Cotton v. White, 131 Ark. 273 , 199 S. W. 116 , we stated: “While it is a general rule that a plaintiff in ejectment must recover upon the strength of his own title, and not upon the weakness of his adversary’s, this rule has no application where the defendant is a mere trespasser invading the actual possession of plaintiff, in which case plaintiff can recover on prior peaceable possession alone. 15 Cyc. 22; Green v. Jordan, 83 Ala. 220 , 3 So. 513 , 3 Am. | 1 | 1946–1946 |
Green v. Jordan
green
1 sentence1946The general rule in ejectment cases is that the plaintiff must recover on the strength of his own title, but in Cotton v. White, 131 Ark. 273 , 199 S. W. 116 , we stated: “While it is a general rule that a plaintiff in ejectment must recover upon the strength of his own title, and not upon the weakness of his adversary’s, this rule has no application where the defendant is a mere trespasser invading the actual possession of plaintiff, in which case plaintiff can recover on prior peaceable possession alone. 15 Cyc. 22; Green v. Jordan, 83 Ala. 220 , 3 So. 513 , 3 Am. | 1 | 1946–1946 |
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.