Poston v. Fears

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Poston v. Fears

828 S.W.2d 845, 309 Ark. 413, 1992 Ark. LEXIS 319

CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas

DecidedMay 26, 1992

Docket92-44

StatusPublished

This text of 828 S.W.2d 845 (Poston v. Fears) 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

Poston v. Fears, 828 S.W.2d 845, 309 Ark. 413, 1992 Ark. LEXIS 319 (Ark. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Robert H. Dudley, Justice.

The plaintiff filed suit against three defendants. Two of the three defendants filed motions for judgments on the pleadings. See A.R.C.P. Rule 12(c). The trial court granted the motions for the two defendants, but the third separate defendant remains in the suit below. Thus, the trial court did not grant a final judgment, see A.R.C.P. Rule 54(b), and yet, the plaintiff seeks to appeal. We dismiss the appeal because the order entered is not an appealable order. Burnley v. Mutual of Omaha, 291 Ark. 185, 723 S.W.2d 363 (1987).

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

Robert H. Dudley, Justice.

The plaintiff filed suit against three defendants. Two of the three defendants filed motions for judgments on the pleadings. See A.R.C.P. Rule 12(c). The trial court granted the motions for the two defendants, but the third separate defendant remains in the suit below. Thus, the trial court did not grant a final judgment, see A.R.C.P. Rule 54(b), and yet, the plaintiff seeks to appeal. We dismiss the appeal because the order entered is not an appealable order. Burnley v. Mutual of Omaha, 291 Ark. 185, 723 S.W.2d 363 (1987).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

828 S.W.2d 845, 309 Ark. 413, 1992 Ark. LEXIS 319, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/poston-v-fears-ark-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack