Legal Opinion

Frolic Footwear, Inc. v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided February 4, 1985No. CR 84-216PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

George Rose Smith, Justice.

Frolic Footwear, Inc., asks us to set aside a $100 fine for contempt of court.

At the trial of a civil case in the Craighead Circuit Court a juror asked to be excused because she would suffer a hardship if forced to accept a juror’s daily fee of $10 instead of her wages as an employee of the petitioner. Act 425 of 1983 provides in part: “No employer shall subject an employee to discharge, loss of sick leave, loss of vacation time, or any other form of penalty on account of his or her absence from employment be reason of jury duty.” Ark. Stat. Ann. § 39-103 (Supp.…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Burgett v. AppersonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1889
  2. Blackard v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1950
  3. Ex parte DaviesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1903
  4. Fulks v. WalkerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1955
  5. Moorman v. TaylorSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1957

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Johnson v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2000
  2. Young v. SmithSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1998
  3. Bates v. McNeilSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1994
  4. Young v. YoungSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1994
  5. Pinckney v. Mass Merchandisers, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arkansas · 1985

9 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