Moore v. Pulaski County Special School District
Case Details
- Judge(s)
- John B. Robbins
- Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
- Published
- Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
- appeal
Related Laws
No specific laws identified for this ruling.
Claim Types
Outcome
Teacher who suffered post-traumatic stress disorder from poisoning incident won damages for one year of paid leave under Arkansas statute. Court awarded $26,657.27 after deducting disability retirement income already received.
Excerpt
1. Statutes — construction — factors considered. — In considering the meaning of a statute, the appellate court considers it just as it reads, giving words their ordinary and usually accepted meaning in common language; if the language of a statute is clear and unambiguous and conveys a clear and definite meaning, there is no occasion for resorting to rules of statutory interpretation; where the meaning is not clear, the court looks to the language of the statute, the subject matter, the remedy provided, the legislative history, and other appropriate means that shed light on the subject; the appellate court will also look to the object to be accomplished and the purpose to be served by the statute. 2. Statutes — construction — standard on appeal. — Although the appellate court is not bound by the decision of the trial court, in absence of a showing that the trial court erred in its interpretation of the law, the appellate court will accept that interpretation as correct on appeal. 3. Statutes — construction — absurd conclusion will not be reached. — The appellate court will not interpret a statute in a manner so as to reach an absurd conclusion that is contrary to legislative intent. 4. Schools school districts — statute expressly directed that school districts incorporate its rights into their written personnel policies — general savings clause insufficient to comply with statute's express directive. — Where appellee contended that Ark. Code Ann. § 6-17-1209 did not provide a private right of action and simply required school districts to incorporate its terms into their written personnel policies, but presented no support for its argument that the general savings clause in the Professional Negotiations Agreement (PNA) was sufficient to comply with the express directive in Ark. Code Ann. § 6-17-1209</cro
What This Ruling Means
This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.
Similar Rulings
Browse Related
Facing something similar at work?
Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.
This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.