Legal Opinion

Parmley v. Moose

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided May 16, 1994No. 93-1400PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Jack Holt, Jr., Chief Justice.

This appeal raises issues concerning the scope of our holding in Weidrick v. Arnold, 310 Ark. 138, 835 S.W.2d 843 (1992), a medical malpractice case, in relation to Ark. Code Ann. § 16-114-204 (Supp. 1993)(“Notice of intent to sue”)- In the present case, the trial court correctly dismissed appellant Nora Parmley’s medical malpractice action with prejudice, ruling that the statute was invalidated in its entirety by Weidrick and that the two-year statute of limitations set forth in Ark. Code Ann. § 16-114-203(a) (Supp. 1993) is controlling.

We addressed this matter…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. McElroy v. GrishamSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1991
  2. Weidrick v. ArnoldSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1992
  3. Thomas v. CornellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1994
  4. Hartford Insurance Group v. CarterSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1971
  5. Allen v. LangstonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1949

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Morrison v. JenningsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1997
  2. Williams v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1999
  3. Brumley v. NaplesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1995
  4. Oglesby v. Baptist Medical SystemSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1995
  5. Bayer CropScience LP v. SchaferSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2011

12 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