Christopher Miller v. Keyunna Brown

2025 Ark. App. 189

• Court: Court of Appeals of Arkansas
• Decided: April 2, 2025
• Status: Published

Opinion

Cite as 2025 Ark. App. 189 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION II No. CV-24-53

Opinion Delivered April 2, 2025 CHRISTOPHER MILLER APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE PULASKI COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, V. ELEVENTH DIVISION [NO. 60DR-23-2749]

KEYUNNA BROWN HONORABLE RITA BAILEY, APPELLEE JUDGE

REVERSED; CIRCUIT COURT ORDER VACATED

N. MARK KLAPPENBACH, Chief Judge

Christopher Miller appeals a final order of protection entered by the Pulaski County

Circuit Court. In this one-brief appeal, Miller argues that the order of protection should be

reversed and dismissed because he was not properly served and because there was insufficient

evidence of domestic abuse. We agree that service was defective; accordingly, we reverse and

vacate the order of protection.

On August 9, 2023, Keyunna Brown filed a petition for an order of protection against

Miller, the father of her child. She alleged that Miller had confronted her at a restaurant on

July 10, 2023, and later that evening, he called her and threatened to kill her. Brown alleged

that Miller also told her that he should have pistol-whipped her at the restaurant. The circuit court entered an ex parte order of protection and set a hearing for August 28, 2023. The

court later entered an amended order setting the hearing for September 28.

Proof of service was filed on September 27 stating that service was completed on

September 26 by serving Miller’s wife at his address. Neither Miller nor counsel on his behalf

appeared at the September 28 hearing. Miller’s counsel did, however, file a motion alleging

that the hearing should be continued because Miller was hospitalized and that the matter

should be dismissed because Miller was not properly served. At the hearing, the circuit court

noted that Miller had been served on September 26 and denied the motion. After hearing

testimony from Brown, the circuit court entered a final order of protection effective until

September 28, 2026. Miller appealed.

Miller first argues that the order of protection should be reversed and dismissed

because service was defective. Arkansas Code Annotated section 9-15-204(b)(1)(A) (Supp.

2023) provides that service of a copy of the petition, the ex parte temporary order of

protection, and notice of the date and place set for the hearing shall be made upon the

respondent at least five days before the date of the hearing. Because Miller was allegedly

served on September 26, and the hearing took place on September 28, he argues that the

five-day requirement was not met.

It is well established that service of valid process is necessary to give a court jurisdiction

over a defendant. Wright v. Wright, 2023 Ark. App. 512, 678 S.W.3d 640. Proceedings

conducted where the attempted service was invalid render judgments arising under them

void. Duvall v. Chiung-Fang Liang, 2014 Ark. App. 359. In Duvall, we held that an order of

2 protection was void where the attempted service did not comply with section 9-15-204 and

Duvall was not present at the hearing. As in Duvall, the statutory-service requirements were

not satisfied here, and Miller did not waive the defense of personal jurisdiction. Because

Miller was not served at least five days before the date of the hearing as required by statute,

the circuit court was without authority to act, and the order is void. Therefore, we vacate

the order of protection.

Reversed; circuit court order vacated.

THYER and BROWN, JJ., agree.

Rojas Smith Attorneys, P.A., by: Heather Hersh, for appellant.

One brief only.