Tag: Appeals

New Appellate Civil Rule 12: Substitution of Parties

There is now in place an appellate procedure rule permitting substitution of parties on appeal. Rule of Appellate Procedure-Civil 12 went into effect on January 1, 2018

Under Rule 12:

  • Substitution. If a party dies after the appellate court acquires jurisdiction of the case, the decedent’s representative may be substituted upon motion filed by the personal representative, any party, or the attorney for the deceased.
  • Suggestion of death. If there is no personal representative, any party may file a suggestion of death on the record. Unless a substitution motion is filed within 90 days, the court may dismiss the appeal or take other appropriate action.
  • Incompetency. If a party becomes incompetent, the party’s representative may be substituted on motion filed with the court.
  • Public officers. When a public officer is a party in his or her official capacity and dies or otherwise ceases to hold office while the case is pending, the officer’s successor is automatically substituted.

Continue reading New Appellate Civil Rule 12: Substitution of Parties

SCOA: Divorce Decree with Property Distribution Agreement Option is Still Final and Appealable

Davis v. Davis, 2016 Ark. 64, 487 S.W.3d 803 (2016).

Divorce decree held in part that all martial property was to be sold at public auction within 90 days. It further held that any agreement of the parties as to division of personal property would be honored and that otherwise it was to be inventoried and sold.

On appeal, the question of whether this was a final and appealable judgment was addressed.

The Arkansas Supreme Court held that it was a final judgment notwithstanding that the parties were permitted to reach agreements as to some of the property.

Continue reading SCOA: Divorce Decree with Property Distribution Agreement Option is Still Final and Appealable

ACOA: If 54(b) Certificate Granted, Interlocutory Appeal Must Be Filed in 30 Days or Waiver

Fire Systems Technology, Inc. v. First Community Bank of Crawford County, 2015 Ark. App. 334, 464 S.W.3d 125 (2015).

Appellant subcontractor appealed partial summary judgment order granting loan foreclosure to bank. Circuit court had granted the foreclosure in an interlocutory order which contained a Rule 54(b) certificate.

The subcontractor had filed a notice of appeal within 30 days of that order, but never lodged the record for the interlocutory appeal. Later, once the entire case concluded, the subcontractor appealed the foreclosure order.

Continue reading ACOA: If 54(b) Certificate Granted, Interlocutory Appeal Must Be Filed in 30 Days or Waiver

SCOA: Extension of Time to Lodge Appeal Record Unjustified If No Deposit Until Extension Deadline

City of Little Rock v. Hermitage Development Corporation, 2015 Ark. 453, 476 S.W.3d 788 (2015).

Circuit court granted appellant’s motion for extension of time to lodge record on appeal per Rule 5 of the Arkansas Rules of Appellate Procedure–Civil.

Appellees filed a motion to dismiss the appeal arguing the extension of time to lodge record was granted in error.

The Arkansas Supreme Court agreed and dismissed the appeal.

The supreme court noted that the court reporter’s deposit for preparing the record was not paid until the last day that the extension could be granted.

Continue reading SCOA: Extension of Time to Lodge Appeal Record Unjustified If No Deposit Until Extension Deadline

New Rule 8 Supersedeas Bond Limit

Steps

In its August 7, 2014 per curiam opinion (2014 Ark. 340), the Arkansas Supreme Court made a revision to Arkansas Rule of Appellate Procedure-Civil 8 that was effective as of that date. (The change stemmed from work of the Special Task Force on Practice and Procedure in Civil Cases.)

The revised Rule 8 adds provisions to the part of the rule concerning supersedeas bonds (paragraph (c)). Previously, the rule did not state a maximum amount for a supersedeas bond.

Pursuant to Ark.Code Ann. § 16-55-214, the rule now states that the maximum amount of a required bond is $25 million for any civil action “regardless of the amount of the judgment.”

However, also per the statute, the rule permits the trial court when necessary to enter orders preventing purposeful dissipation or diversion of assets in an attempt to evade the judgment. When necessary, the trial court may in such cases enter orders including requiring bond up to the full amount of the judgment. Continue reading New Rule 8 Supersedeas Bond Limit