Category: Uncategorized

Arkansas Court of Appeals Swearing-In Ceremonies

~ Tasha C. Taylor ~ 1 Comment

Three Arkansas Court of Appeals Judges were sworn in on January 12, 2011: Judge Robert Gladwin, Judge Josephine Linker Hart, and Judge Robin Wynne.  Gladwin and Wynne were both unopposed in the 2010 elections for their positions.  Judge Josephine Linker Hart received 51.83% of the vote to defeat Circuit Court Judge Rhonda Wood on May 18, 2010. 

Click here to view the video from the January 12, 2011 swearing-in ceremony for Judges Gladwin, Hart, and Wynne.

Recently appointed Judges Cliff Hoofman and Doug Martin will be sworn in as Arkansas Court of Appeals Judges on January 16, 2011 at 2:00 p.m.  A live video of that ceremony can be viewed online through the Arkansas Judiciary’s website. 

Click here to find the video link for the January 16, 2011 swearing-in ceremony for Judges Hoofman and Martin.  That link will be available by 2:00 p.m. on the day of the ceremony.

Arkansas’s Administrative Office of the Courts Seeks Proposals for New Statewide Electronic Filing System

~ Tasha C. Taylor ~ 1 Comment

The Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC), pursuant to its authority under Administrative Order 21, took a step toward implementing electronic filing statewide when it recently announced its request for proposals “for systems and services for the implementation of a comprehensive statewide electronic filing system for the Arkansas Judiciary.”  According to the AOC, the filing system must meet the following requirements:

The system must have the proven capability of handling all types of cases including small claims, traffic, criminal, civil, probate, juvenile, and domestic relations. The system must also have been successfully implemented at limited, general, and appellate levels of a multi-jurisdictional court system.

Arkansas appellate attorneys and Arkansas general practitoners would benefit from the type of uniform statewide filing system, as described by the AOC.

Appellate Court Updates

~ Tasha C. Taylor

The Administrative Office of the Courts provides a monthly Appellate Update to assist with finding published decisions of the Arkansas Supreme Court and the Arkansas Court of Appeals.  The Appellate Update is not meant to provide a summary of each case, but rather provides highlights of the issues involved in each case mentioned in the publication. 

The Appellate Update can be found on the Court’s website each month.  The March volume is currently available.

Below is a sample of the case highlights included by topic in the March volume of the Appellate Update:

2010 Arkansas Appellate Court Election Roundup

~ Tasha C. Taylor ~ 2 Comments

Arkansas’s judicial elections take place on May 18, 2010.  Early voting begins on May 3, 2010.

The following is a list of judicial candidates running for the open seats on the Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals (contested positions are highlighted):

Arkansas Supreme Court

These positions on the Arkansas Supreme Court will be elected in a statewide election.

Arkansas Court of Appeals

The only contested position on the Arkansas Court of Appeals is that for District 02, Position 01.  Only the residents residing in District 02 will be permitted to vote in this contested election.  That judicial district is comprised of the following 18 counties:  Baxter, Boone, Cleburne, Conway, Faulkner, Fulton, Independence, Izard, Jackson, Lawrence, Marion, Newton, Pope, Randolph, Searcy, Sharp, Stone, and Van Buren.

For a full list of candidates for all Arkansas judicial elections in 2010, visit Judgepedia.org.

To read the rules, regulations, and procedures governing judicial elections in Arkansas in 2010, view the Arkansas Judicial Elections Guide for 2010.

Arkansas Supreme Court Overrules Previous Arkansas Appellate Court Decisions Inconsistent with the Court’s Strict Preservation Rule

~ Tasha C. Taylor ~ 2 Comments

Today, the Arkansas Supreme Court overruled two previous decisions that were in conflict with the Court’s holdings that require a party to make a “contemporaneous objection at trial” in order to preserve an argument for appellate review. Lamontagne v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 2010 Ark. 190, at 7, Case No. 09-859 (April 22, 2010). 

In its decision, the Court overruled its previous decision in Jones v. Abraham, 341 Ark. 66, 15 S.W.3d 310 (2000), and the Court of Appeals’s previous decision in Morrow v. Morrow, 270 Ark. 31, 603 S.W.2d 431 (Ark. App. 1980). See Lamontagne.

In 1980, the Court of Appeals observed and held in Morrow that “[t]raditionally appeals from the chancery court are reviewed de novo and there is no requirement of objections to the findings, conclusions and decree of the court to obtain review on appeal.” 270 Ark. at 33, 603 S.W.2d at 432.

In its 2000 decision in Jones, the Arkansas Supreme Court relied on the Court of Appeals’s decision in Morrow to hold that there was no requirement that a contemporaneous objection be made in order to preserve an issue for appeal. Jones, 341 Ark. at 72, 15 S.W.3d at 314. 

Today, in Lamontagne, the Court pointed out that while the Jones decision relied on Morrow, the Morrow decision–as noted by Judge Newbern in his dissent to Morrow–did not rely on any authority for its proposition that an argument can be raised in an appeal from a chancery court decision that was not made below.  In overruling Jones and Morrow, the Court relied, in part, on its 1951 decision in Umberger v. Westmoreland, 218 Ark. 632, 645, 238 S.W.2d 495, 502 (1951), in which the Court held: “we unanimously hold that in cases hereafter tried, all objections to evidence and witnesses must be made in a timely manner in the trial court, and if not so made, such objections will be considered as waived when the case reaches us on appeal.”

From the time the Umberger decision was handed down, more than fifty years ago, the Arkansas Supreme Court has consistently held that “it is incumbent on the parties to raise arguments initially to the circuit court and to give that court an opportunity to consider them.” see Roberts v. Yang, 2010 Ark. 55, at 6, ___ S.W.3d ___; see also Lamontagne, supra.  The Court’s decision today overruling previous appellate court decisions inconsistent with this position confirms that the Court has no plans to waiver from this well-settled rule, as it is frequently requested to do by attorneys.

Judge Wills, in a concurring opinion, which was joined by Judge Danielson, expresses some concern that the Court had to deal with this issue:

It is both remarkable and troubling that this question persists and this court must again clarify the necessity of raising issues below to preserve them for appeal.  I write separately to “call attention of the Bench and Bar” to this issue, as this court did in Umberger over half a century ago.

Lamontagne, 2010 Ark. 190, at 13 (Wills, J., Danielson, J., concurring).

It is hopeful that the Court’s opinion today will alleviate any confusion that caused concern on the part of the concurring justices–a confusion that, at least in part, was caused by the appellate courts’ decisions in Jones and Morrow.

Arkansas Court of Appeals Dismisses Case without Prejudice for Lack of Final Order; Court Notes that Only Documents From the Record May be Included in an Appellant’s Addendum

~ Tasha C. Taylor ~ 5 Comments

Today’s unpublished per curiam from the Court of Appeals (en banc)–Bank of the Ozarks v. Jim Wood Co., Case No. CA08-1488–serves as a reminder to practitioners of the necessity of appealing from a final order: 

The finality problem arises because the Bank’s claim against Capital has not been adjudicated, non-suited, or otherwise resolved by the circuit court. Under Ark. R. Civ. P. 54(b), an order that fails to adjudicate all of the claims as to all of the parties is not final for purposes of appeal. Although the circuit court may direct entry of a final judgment as to fewer than all of the parties by executing a Rule 54(b) certificate, that was not done here. In the absence of a final order, we must dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See generally Hodges v. Huckabee, 333 Ark. 247, 968 S.W.2d 619 (1998).

The Court dismissed the appeal without prejudice.

In addition to the lack of a final order, the Court noted that the appellant’s addendum contained documents that were not included in the record on appeal.  The Court’s per curiam also reminds practitioners that Arkansas Appellate Courts do not consider documents included in an appellant’s addendum that are not contained in the record.  See, e.g., Union Pac. R.R. v. Barber, 356 Ark. 268, 149 S.W.3d 325 (2004); Barnett v. Monumental Gen. Ins. Co., 354 Ark. 692, 128 S.W.3d 803 (2003); Clark v. Pine Bluff Civ. Serv. Comm’n, 353 Ark. 810, 120 S.W.3d 541 (2003).

Welcome to ArkansasAppeals.com

~ Tasha C. Taylor

Welcome to ArkansasAppeals.com. Our goal is to provide useful information and helpful insight into cases and developments affecting Appellate Practice in Arkansas. Our postings will focus on significant developments in Arkansas law and how those developments affect Appellate Practice. These entries will cover a broad range of substantive law topics, as well as the Rules of Civil and Appellate Procedure.