Jackson v. Yowell

818 S.W.2d 950, 307 Ark. 222, 1991 Ark. LEXIS 547
CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas
DecidedNovember 11, 1991
Docket91-171
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 818 S.W.2d 950 (Jackson v. Yowell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Jackson v. Yowell, 818 S.W.2d 950, 307 Ark. 222, 1991 Ark. LEXIS 547 (Ark. 1991).

Opinion

Tom Glaze, Justice.

On May 22, 1986, appellee brought suit against appellants seeking, among other things, to set aside certain deeds and to quiet title in the mineral estate described in the deeds. After appellants filed their answer, little, and then no, activity occurred in the lawsuit, so the trial court dismissed the case for want of prosecution on January 2,1990, pursuant to the court’s standing order dated January 2, 1987. The trial court, however, ordered appellee’s case reinstated on January 25,1990. The appellants then moved to vacate the restatement order pursuant to ARCP 41(b), claiming the dismissal should have been with prejudice because the dismissal had been appellee’s second. The trial court denied appellants’ motion and appellants bring this appeal.

We do not reach appellants’ Rule 41(b) issue because the trial court’s order denying appellants’ motion to vacate the reinstatement of appellant’s case is not a final judgment or order from which an appeal may be taken. Rule 2(a)(1) of the Arkansas Rules of Appellate Procedure. For a judgment to be final, it must dismiss the parties from the court, discharge them from the action, or conclude their rights to the subject matter in controversy. Roberts Enterprises, Inc. v. Arkansas Highway Comm’n, 277 Ark. 25, 638 S.W.2d 675 (1982); see also 4 C.J.S. Appeal & Error § 121(c) (1957) (which provides, generally, an appeal will not lie from an order setting aside an order of dismissal.) Here, the trial court’s order makes no such disposition of the parties’ case, and in fact, retained jurisdiction over the parties and issues in controversy for future adjudication.

Because the trial court’s order is not a final one from which an appeal may be taken, we dismiss appellants’ appeal.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Scott v. Revclaims, LLC
2021 Ark. App. 401 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 2021)
Davis v. Davis
2016 Ark. 64 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 2016)
Office of Child Support Enforcement v. Oliver
921 S.W.2d 602 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1996)
Tucker v. Lake View School District No. 25
917 S.W.2d 530 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1996)
Martin v. Black & White Cab Co.
901 S.W.2d 17 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1995)
Chambers v. Manning
868 S.W.2d 64 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1993)
Kelly v. Kelly
835 S.W.2d 869 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1992)
Leonard v. Leonard's Hardware, Inc.
828 S.W.2d 846 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
818 S.W.2d 950, 307 Ark. 222, 1991 Ark. LEXIS 547, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackson-v-yowell-ark-1991.