6 Arkansas opinions name it 1 courts 2003–2011 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 |
|---|---|---|
Van Hovenberg v. Holmangreen2 sentences2008See Van Hovenberg v. Holman, 201 Ark. 370 , 144 S.W.2d 719 (1940). 2007See Van Hovenberg v. Holman , 201 Ark. 370 , 144 S.W.2d 719 (1940). | 4 | 4 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arkansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Fort Smith School District v. Beebe
green
2 sentences2011The operative principle with respect to your question is perhaps most aptly summarized as follows in Fort Smith School District v. Beebe , 2009 Ark. 333 , 11-12 , 322 S.W.3d 1 , *7-8: [A]ccording to its plain language, Amendment 74 "allows for variances in school district revenues above the base millage rate of 25 mills, which may lead to enhanced curricula, facilities, and equipment which are superior to what is deemed adequate by the State." Lake View Sch. 2011The operative principle with respect to your question is perhaps most aptly summarized as follows in Fort Smith School District v. Beebe , 2009 Ark. 333 , 11-12 , 322 S.W.3d 1 , *7-8: [A]ccording to its plain language, Amendment 74 "allows for variances in school district revenues above the base millage rate of 25 mills, which may lead to enhanced curricula, facilities, and equipment which are superior to what is deemed adequate by the State." Lake View Sch. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Kyle v. State
green
2 sentences2009In Kyle v. State , 312 Ark. 274 , 275 , 849 S.W.2d 935 (1993), the Arkansas Supreme Court embraced this principle based upon a court's inherent jurisdictional authority: In this appeal, we are asked to decide whether a circuit court retains jurisdiction over a defendant who has been ordered to pay restitution as a condition of a deferred imposition of sentence until the restitution has been paid in full, even beyond the duration of *Page 3 deferment. 2009In Kyle v. State , 312 Ark. 274 , 275 , 849 S.W.2d 935 (1993), the Arkansas Supreme Court embraced this principle based upon a court's inherent jurisdictional authority: In this appeal, we are asked to decide whether a circuit court retains jurisdiction over a defendant who has been ordered to pay restitution as a condition of a deferred imposition of sentence until the restitution has been paid in full, even beyond the duration of *Page 3 deferment. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
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.