Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ward v. Williams

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided September 25, 2003No. 02-1380Published

1DissentAnnabelle Clinton Imber, Justice

I must dissent because I believe that the trial court in this case impermissibly deferred to the Court of Appeals’ erroneous language, thereby abdicating its role as factfinder. In order to fully understand how the error in this case occurred, it is necessary to go back to the language in the Court of Appeals’ unpublished opinion in Ward I, in which the Court of Appeals incorrectly made specific findings:

The evidence demonstrates that the transaction at issue clearly had the requisite objective indicators of mutual agreement necessary to form a contract and that appellant established, by…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Werbe v. HoltSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1950
  2. Dolphin v. WilsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1997
  3. Swink v. GiffinSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1998
  4. Neely v. JonesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1960
  5. Neely v. JonesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1962

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

Powered by the Exa API