Osro Cobb

The case involved appellants who sued appellees in equity for specific performance of a contract to sell real property located in Washington County, Arkansas, after filing a lis pendens notice. The trial court dismissed the complaint following a demurrer, but the Arkansas Supreme Court reversed and remanded in 1964, finding a prima facie case. While the appeal was pending, appellees sold the property to a third party, leading the trial court on remand to dismiss for lack of equity jurisdiction since appellants no longer held title. The Supreme Court reversed again, ruling that the lis pendens statute (Ark. Stat. Ann. § 27-501) provides constructive notice binding subsequent purchasers through the conclusion of appellate review, and that the chancery court retained jurisdiction to award damages as an alternative remedy when specific performance becomes impossible due to the conveyance.

propertyprocedure

The case concerned an insurance dispute in which Union Bankers denied claims by the estate of William Felkins for two hospitalizations—one for a jejunal ulcer and one for a blood clot in the superior mesentery artery—citing two exclusionary riders attached to a medical-expense policy. The trial court, sitting as fact-finder, entered judgment for the estate for policy benefits, statutory penalty, and attorney fees. On appeal the Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed, construing the riders’ ambiguous language strictly against the insurer under established rules of policy interpretation, applying ejusdem generis to limit the exclusions, and finding substantial evidence that the blood clot was not shown to have been caused by an excluded digestive-tract or cardiovascular-renal condition.

business & regulatoryhealthcare

In this case, a divorced husband sought to reduce his alimony and child support obligations under a 1963 divorce decree that had incorporated the parties' written property settlement agreement. The trial court denied the request as to alimony, holding it lacked jurisdiction to modify that portion of the decree. On appeal, the Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed, ruling that once a divorce decree incorporates a property settlement fixing alimony, the court has no power to later modify the alimony award based on changed financial circumstances. The court distinguished this from child support awards, which remain modifiable, and noted the husband's income had actually increased while the children's needs were unchanged. The decree was therefore affirmed.

family lawproperty

The case involved a dispute between a father (life tenant) and his minor son (remainderman) over who was entitled to $8,000 in fire insurance proceeds on a family home that the father had deeded to the son while reserving a life estate. The father had purchased the insurance policy in his own name and paid the premiums after divorcing the son's mother. The court ruled that the father was entitled to the entire proceeds, holding that a life tenant insuring property for his own benefit is generally entitled to the insurance money absent any agreement or independent fiduciary duty requiring otherwise. The decision followed established precedent that insurance contracts are personal and inure to the benefit of the insured who paid the premiums.

family lawproperty

The case was an appeal from a conviction for first-degree murder of North Little Rock Police Officer Jerral Vaughn, who was shot during a 1963 traffic stop of a vehicle in which the appellant was a passenger. The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed the conviction after reviewing claims related to jury instructions on lesser offenses, denial of a motion to reduce the charge, and various pretrial motions including discovery and venue. The core reasoning was that witness testimony and physical evidence established that the appellant fired first with deliberation and premeditation, and any instructional errors were harmless given the jury's finding of first-degree murder.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved an insured who applied for two insurance policies from the insurer, disclosing a 1962 disc operation but omitting subsequent spinal fusion surgeries; the insurer issued the policies and later denied claims for hospitalization after a 1964 car accident, asserting fraudulent concealment of a pre-existing condition. The trial court, sitting as jury, ruled for the insured on the claims and awarded statutory penalties and attorney's fees. The appellate court affirmed, reasoning that the partial disclosure of the disc surgery and surgeon's name sufficiently put the insurer on notice to investigate further, so there was no material fraudulent omission under Arkansas insurance statutes, and the insurer's failure to confess judgment on the proven amounts supported the penalty award.

business & regulatory

In Gross v. State, the appellant had received a suspended five-year sentence in 1958 for burglary and grand larceny under Ark. Stat. Ann. § 43-2324. In 1963, after his involvement in a fatal incident leading to a first-degree murder charge, the Pulaski Circuit Court revoked the suspension and imposed the sentence, prior to his later murder conviction. The appellant petitioned for habeas corpus relief under Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1, arguing that a subsequent conviction was required before revocation. The Pulaski Circuit Court dismissed the petition, and the Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed, ruling that the statute grants trial courts discretion to revoke based on the interests of the defendant and society without mandating a conviction, and that no gross abuse of discretion occurred here.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned a 1905 deed in which the grantors conveyed 'all of the coal, oil and mineral' rights under certain land in Logan County, Arkansas; successors to the surface title contended that natural gas was not included because it was not commonly recognized as a mineral in that locality at the time of the conveyance, while successors to the mineral interest argued that it was conveyed. The trial court found for the mineral owners after considering historical evidence, and the Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed. The court reviewed exhibits including early 20th-century geological reports, gas field discoveries in nearby counties, oil and gas leases executed in Logan County as early as 1896 and 1901, and contemporary newspaper accounts, concluding that these materials showed gas was a commonly recognized mineral in the area by July 1905. Accordingly, the deed was held to have transferred the gas rights along with the other minerals.

property

The case involved the conviction of appellant, a minister, for second-degree murder after a woman died during his attempted unlawful abortion on her. All issues on appeal concerned the admissibility of appellant's written confession, which he claimed was improperly obtained. The trial court held a hearing outside the jury's presence under Act 489 of 1965, found by a preponderance of the evidence that the confession was voluntary with no coercion or inducements, that appellant had been advised of his rights including to counsel (which he declined), and admitted it into evidence. The appellate court affirmed the conviction and seven-year sentence, concluding that substantial evidence supported the trial court's determination of voluntariness and admissibility.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved a dispute over title to 240 acres of land in Lincoln County, Arkansas, where the original owner (appellee) had executed a quitclaim deed to another party (appellant) in exchange for funds to cover mortgage payments on the property. The Chancery Court found that the deed was intended only as security for the debt rather than an absolute transfer of title, that the accompanying notes were usurious, and that the appellee retained the right to redeem the land by the end of 1964 as agreed; it further held that the appellant was subrogated to the lien of the prior mortgage to the extent of actual advances made. The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed, reasoning that the evidence supported treating the deed as a mortgage, that the prior Circuit Court case on real estate commissions was not res judicata on the title issue, and that the redemption action was timely filed within the applicable period. The court rejected challenges regarding usury allegations, witness testimony, and other procedural points.

property

This case concerned whether citizens of Corning, Arkansas, a city of the second class, could validly use the initiative process under Amendment 7 to the state constitution to repeal city council resolutions that had created and activated a local housing authority, and thereby dissolve the authority. The trial court ruled that the initiative ordinance passed by voters in the 1964 election was effective and that the housing authority ceased to exist. The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the ordinance was legislative in character because it addressed policy matters such as appropriations of public funds and the creation or dissolution of a public corporate body. The court reasoned that such actions fall within the scope of the initiative power reserved to the people by Amendment 7, consistent with its prior precedent treating municipal cooperation with housing authorities as legislative rather than administrative.

electionsbusiness & regulatory

The case involved a nighttime highway collision in which plaintiffs stopped to avoid a disabled van truck blocking the road and were then struck by a following vehicle; plaintiffs sued the van's driver (Gier), his employer (Wheaton Van Lines), and the third driver (Mayfield) alleging negligence, including failure to deploy required warning flares under Arkansas statute. The jury returned verdicts awarding plaintiffs higher damages against the van parties than against Mayfield. On appeal, the van defendants challenged the denial of a directed verdict and the form and amounts of the apportioned verdicts; the court affirmed, holding that the evidence created a jury question on negligence, that any objection to the verdict forms permitting apportionment among joint tortfeasors was waived by failure to raise it before the jury was discharged, and that the judgments were otherwise consistent with precedent on contribution and several liability.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The plaintiff sued drug manufacturers and distributors in February 1965 for injuries allegedly caused by a prescription medication taken in 1961-1962, claiming breach of express and implied warranties that the drug was safe and fit for use. The defendants demurred on grounds of lack of privity, and the trial court sustained the demurrer and dismissed the complaint. On appeal, the Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed, holding that Act 35 of 1965—which eliminated lack of privity as a defense in warranty and negligence actions against manufacturers—did not apply because the statute expressly excluded pending litigation and took effect only after the suit was filed. The court reasoned that the Act's clear language controlled and declined to extend its reach beyond the terms provided by the legislature.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved a workers' compensation claim by an employee of Burrow Construction Co. who sustained disabling back injuries while lifting a heavy object in the course of his duties in February 1960. The Commission initially awarded temporary total disability benefits and 15% permanent partial disability but later denied a supplemental claim for increased disabilities, finding on the record that the worsening condition stemmed from an unknown cause at a higher spinal level unrelated to the original injury. The circuit court reversed the Commission and awarded 75% permanent disability to the body as a whole. On appeal, the court determined that the Commission's denial was not supported by substantial evidence, as medical testimony and the absence of any intervening injury linked the increased disabilities to the 1960 accident, and it remanded the matter to the Commission for a proper award determination.

labor & employmentprocedure

This case involved the conviction of appellant for rape under Arkansas law, where the jury returned a verdict of guilty as charged, resulting in a mandatory death sentence. The court reviewed the entire record, including the sufficiency of the evidence identifying the appellant through physical evidence like hair, fibers, and clothing matches from FBI analysis, as well as the victim's testimony and circumstances of the assault. It addressed various objections regarding trial procedures, evidence admission, and closing arguments, finding no errors. The court concluded that the trial was fair and affirmed the judgment and sentence.

criminal law