Jonesboro Healthcare Ctr., LLC v. Eaton-Moery Envtl. Servs.

Docket Number11-294
Decision Date01 December 2011
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
28 cases
  • McGehee v. Hutchinson
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Arkansas
    • 15 Abril 2017
    ...Arkansas law. However, it is clear that Rule 41 is subject to broad equitable exceptions. In Jonesboro Healthcare Center, LLC, v. Eaton-Moery Environmental Servs., Inc., 385 S.W.3d 797 (Ark. 2011), the Arkansas Supreme Court determined that a dismissal due to lack of subject matter jurisdic......
  • State v. Tyson
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • 12 Abril 2012
    ...all other interpretive guides defer is to give effect to the intent of the drafting body. See Jonesboro Healthcare Ctr., LLC v. Eaton–Moery Envtl. Servs., Inc., 2011 Ark. 501, 385 S.W.3d 797. When the language is plain and unambiguous, we determine the intent of the drafting body from the o......
  • Desoto Gathering Co. v. Hill
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • 29 Marzo 2018
    ...standard. Ballard Group, Inc. v. BP Lubricants USA, Inc. , 2014 Ark. 276, 436 S.W.3d 445 ; Jonesboro Healthcare Ctr., LLC v. Eaton–Moery Envtl. Servs., Inc. , 2011 Ark. 501, 385 S.W.3d 797. However, the construction of a court rule is a question of law, which we review de novo. Jonesboro, s......
  • Curtis v. Michael Lemna & New Champions Golf & Country Club
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • 18 Septiembre 2014
    ...on appeal, and is a matter this court is obliged to raise on its own when the parties do not. Jonesboro Healthcare Ctr., LLC v. Eaton-Moery Envtl. Servs., Inc., 2011 Ark. 501, 385 S.W.3d 797. Accordingly, I disagree with the majority's conclusion that the Commission properly determined it h......
  • Get Started for Free
1 books & journal articles
  • 03 41.2 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE
    • United States
    • Arkansas Bar Association Arkansas Form Book - Complete (2023 Ed.) Chapter 3 CIVIL PROCEDURE AND DISCOVERY
    • Invalid date
    ...to clean up their dockets and get stale cases off the active docket." Jonesboro Healthcare Ctr. v. Eaton-Moery Environmental Svcs., 2011 Ark. 501, 385 S.W.3d 797. 4. Here, Plaintiff filed the present complaint against Defendant on [date]. There has been no activity in this case since [date ......