Legal Opinion · Dissent

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Londagin

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided March 1, 2001No. 00-1083Published

1Dissent

W.H. “Dub” Arnold, Chief Justice,

dissenting. I disagree ustice, court was correct when it allowed the Londagins to introduce evidence of Wal-Mart’s actions seeking to satisfy Mr. Perkins’s complaint. I believe the trial court erred. I, therefore, must dissent. Rule 408 of the Arkansas Rules of Evidence, entitled “Compromise and offers to compromise” provides:

Evidence of (1) furnishing, offering, or promising to furnish, or (2) accepting, offering, or promising to accept, a valuable consideration in compromising or attempting to compromise a claim which was disputed as to either validity or…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Elrod v. G & R Construction Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1982
  2. Sokolowski v. Medi Mart, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1991
  3. Rosales v. LupienConnecticut Appellate Court · 1998
  4. Ferguson v. GraddySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1978

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API