Legal Opinion

Hames v. Cravens

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided April 9, 1998No. 97-687PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

W.H. “Dub” Arnold, Chiefjustice.

This is an appeal from the Pulaski County Circuit Court, Second Division, and from an order dismissing the appellants’ complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Finding no merit in appellants’ arguments, we affirm.

Appellants, Ben Robinson and Pat Hames, are husband and wife and, respectively, own 1% and 49% of the issued and outstanding common stock of Partners in Rehab, Inc., a closely-held Arkansas corporation. Appellee Marybeth Cravens owns the remaining 50% of the Partners stock. Hames and Cravens are the sole directors of Partners. On May 16,…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Deitsch v. TillerySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1992
  2. Battle v. HarrisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1989
  3. Neal v. WilsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1994
  4. Brown v. TuckerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1997
  5. Wiseman v. BatchelorSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1993

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. Ghegan & Ghegan, Inc. v. WeissSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1999
  2. Cotten v. FooksSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2001
  3. Grine v. Board of TrusteesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1999
  4. Combs v. Pricewaterhousecoopers LLPCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2004
  5. Farm Bureau Insurance Co. of Arkansas, Inc. v. Running M Farms, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 2006

33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API