Products Liability Series: Does Arkansas Law Recognize a Claim for Medical Monitoring?
No. Medical monitoring may possibly be treated as a type of damages, but is not a separate cause of action in Arkansas. The Rule. Although the case law on this topic is scant in Arkansas, in one case the Arkansas Supreme Court acknowledged that there is no standalone claim for medical monitoring…
Products Liability Series: Is the Violation of a Statute Negligence Per Se?
The answer to this question varies widely from state to state. But in Arkansas “the violation of a statute is only evidence of negligence and does not constitute negligence per se.” Cent. Oklahoma Pipeline, Inc. v. Hawk Field Servs., LLC, 2012 Ark. 157, 17, 400 S.W.3d 701, 712 (2012); Shannon v…
Arkansas' New Driverless-Vehicle Bill Makes Important Products Liability Distinction
All that remains for an updated driverless-vehicle bill in Arkansas is the signature of Governor Asa Hutchinson. House Bill 1562, which amends Arkansas’ 2019 pilot program for autonomous vehicles was approved by a unanimous vote of the Arkansas House of Representatives in March, and was approved by…
Injured Workers Cannot Use the Declaratory Judgment Act to Avoid Exclusive Jurisdiction in the Workers' Compensation Commission
The Arkansas Supreme Court recently handed down an opinion that should reassure employers dealing with an incident involving a workplace injury. The Court affirmed that disputes over such injuries belong in the Workers’ Compensation Commission (“Commission”) and that an employee may not utilize the…
Court of Appeals Distinguishes Between Possible and Probable Causes, Affirming Directed Verdict in Products Liability Case
The Arkansas Court of Appeals recently emphasized that a plaintiff must put on evidence during her case-in-chief to eliminate other causes that may fairly arise from the evidence. Otherwise, there is no question for the jury on proximate cause. The dispute in Miaoulis v. Toyota, 2021 Ark. App. 19…