Blair v. Deline

• Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas
• Decided: October 21, 2020
• Docket: 2:20-cv-00161
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS DELTA DIVISION

MASON BLAIR PLAINTIFF

v. Case No. 2:20-cv-00161-LPR

DONALD F. DELINE, DELINE FARMS SOUTH1 DEFENDANTS

ORDER

On July 24, 2020, Defendant Deline Farms South removed this case from Phillips County Circuit Court. (Doc. 1). Upon removal of the case there appeared to be several pending motions. One of those apparently live motions was a Motion to Dismiss Third-Party Complaint (Doc. 14) by Farm Bureau Town & Country Insurance Company of Missouri (“FBTC”). This Motion had been filed by FBTC when the case was still in state court. The Deline Defendants had filed a third- party complaint against FBTC, and FBTC was claiming that the Third-Party Complaint should be dismissed or severed from the original case. There was nothing to suggest that the state court had already decided the Motion. On September 9, 2020, the Court addressed what appeared to be the outstanding motions in a Consolidated Order. (Doc. 31). This included the Motion to Dismiss Third-Party Complaint. In its Consolidated Order, the Court denied that Motion in part and held it in abeyance in part. (Doc. 31 ¶ 3). The Court instructed the Deline Defendants to file a supplemental Response to the Motion and instructed FBTC to file a supplemental Reply. (Id.). On September 10, 2020, the Court held a hearing to discuss any necessary actions to move

1 The Clerk’s Office is instructed to remove Farm Bureau Town & Country Insurance Company of Missouri as “Third Party Defendant” in this case and to remove the designation of “Third Party Plaintiff” from Donald F. Deline. The remaining parties in this action are Mason Blair as Plaintiff, and Donald F. Deline and Deline Farms South as Defendants. the case along. (Doc. 35). At the hearing, counsel for Mr. Blair was present and counsel for the Deline Defendants was present. No counsel attended on behalf of FBTC. The Court inquired about the status of FBTC as a third-party defendant in this case. Counsel for Deline and counsel for Mr. Blair informed the Court that they believed the claims against FBTC had been severed prior to removal by an oral order in state court. Specifically, they believed the state court denied

the Motion to Dismiss Third-Party Complaint but granted FBTC’s alternative request in that Motion to sever the case. An Arkansas state court order must be reduced to writing prior to removal to be binding here. McGhee v. Ark. State Bd. of Collection Agencies, 368 Ark. 60, 67, 243 S.W.3d 278, 284 (2006) (“[A]n oral order announced from the bench does not become effective until reduced to writing and filed.”) Accordingly, the Court directed the Deline Defendants to submit a brief to explain their position on whether the third-party claims were actually removed to federal court. The Court further directed the Deline Defendants to submit a transcript of the state court proceeding where the oral ruling was made, and related state court documentation. (Doc. 37). The Court permitted Mr. Blair to file similar papers and for FBTC to

make a “special appearance” to do the same. (Id.). Subsequently, the Deline Defendants filed a Memorandum Concerning Removal of Third- Party Claims. (Doc. 38). They recounted that, at a hearing on June 25, 2020, “Circuit Judge Richard Proctor made an oral ruling denying Farm Bureau’s Motion to Dismiss and granting Farm Bureau’s Motion to Sever.” (Id. at 2). They explained that, at the time of removal, the state case file “did not contain a formal written Order regarding Farm Bureau’s severance request.” (Id.). However, “[f]urther investigation” revealed that Judge Proctor “did execute a written Order mandating severance of the relevant claims on July 15, 2020.”2 (Id. at 2-3). This was nine (9)

2 Judge Proctor dated the Order as “7-15-2020” next to his signature. The Order is file-marked for July 20, 2020. days before removal. The Deline Defendants provided a copy of the written severance Order as well as FBTC’s Notice of Appeal in state court regarding the denial of their Motion to Dismiss. (Ex. A to Doc. 38; Ex. B to Doc. 38). Mr. Blair also responded to the Court’s Order. (Doc. 40). He stated that he did not dispute the information provided in the Deline Defendants’ Memorandum. Mr. Blair’s position was also that the third-party claims had been severed prior to removal. (d.). Given that Judge Proctor issued the written severance Order on July 15, 2020, which was prior to removal on July 24, 2020, the third-party claims are not properly before this Court. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 1. FBTC’s Motion to Dismiss Third-Party Complaint (Doc. 14) is DENIED AS MOOT. 2. Numbered paragraphs two and three of the Court’s Consolidated Order (Doc. 31) are STRICKEN. 3. FBTC is removed from this case as a third-party defendant. 4. The Court directs the Clerk’s Office to remove FBTC from the docket caption. DATED this 21st day of October 2020.

LEE P. RUDOFSKY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE