Legal Opinion

Levi Strauss & Co. v. Crockett Motor Sales, Inc.

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided November 9, 1987No. 87-88PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Tom Glaze, Justice.

This conflict of laws case involves a garnishment proceeding against appellant, Levi Strauss & Co., on wages earned by one of its employees, Gloria Penn, who now lives in Tennessee. In this proceeding, appellee, Crockett Motor Sales, Inc., seeks to garnish earnings earned by Penn while working in a Levi Strauss plant located in Tennessee. Levi Strauss, a foreign corporation registered to do business in Arkansas, answered Crockett Motor’s writ of garnishment, stating that Strauss’s Little Rock plant, where Penn previously worked, had closed, and she now worked in its…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Shaffer v. HeitnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  3. Harris v. BalkSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
  4. Harvey v. Great Northern Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
  5. State Ex Rel. Department of Revenue v. Control Data Corp.Oregon Supreme Court · 1986

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Peterson v. Islamic Republic of IranCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
  2. State v. Western Union Financial Services, Inc.Arizona Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Malone & Hyde, Inc. v. ChisleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1992
  4. Poston v. PostonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1993
  5. State v. Western Union Financial Services, Inc.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2008

4 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