Legal Opinion

Amant v. Callahan

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided July 7, 2000No. 99-1009PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LAVENSKI R. SMITH, Justice.

This is a probate case. Appelstice. Amant, as estate devisees, assert that the Garland County probate court erroneously granted fees to the administrator, the estate attorney, and estate accountants. Appellants contend that the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the U.S. Constitution as well as the doctrine of res judicata preclude the award of fees because they had been previously sought and denied in an Oklahoma probate court. They also assert that the trial court erred in granting these fees because they are excessive under the statutes, and because they were…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. First Commercial Trust Co. v. RankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1996
  2. Babb v. MatlockSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2000
  3. Estate of Torian v. SmithSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1978
  4. Buchte v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1999
  5. Barrera v. VanpeltSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1998

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Blunt v. CartwrightSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2000
  2. Arkansas Department of Human Services v. CoxSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2002
  3. Freeman v. RushtonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2005
  4. Dillard v. NixSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2001
  5. Edmundson v. Estate of FountainSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2004

10 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