Progressive Eldercare Svcs.-Saline, Inc. v. Garrett

2016 Ark. App. 518
CourtCourt of Appeals of Arkansas
DecidedNovember 2, 2016
DocketCV-15-773
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 2016 Ark. App. 518 (Progressive Eldercare Svcs.-Saline, Inc. v. Garrett) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Progressive Eldercare Svcs.-Saline, Inc. v. Garrett, 2016 Ark. App. 518 (Ark. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

Cite as 2016 Ark. App. 518

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISIONS II & III No. CV-15-773

PROGRESSIVE ELDERCARE Opinion Delivered NOVEMBER 2, 2016 SERVICES-SALINE, INC., d/b/a HEARTLAND REHABILITATION AND APPEAL FROM THE SALINE COUNTY CARE CENTER, PROGRESSIVE CIRCUIT COURT ELDERCARE SERVICES, INC.; [NO. 63-CV-13-354-3] PROCARE THERAPY SERVICES, LLC; HONORABLE GRISHAM PHILLIPS, JEJ INVESTMENTS, LLC; PONTHIE JUDGE HOLDINGS, LLC; SOUTHERN ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, LLC; AFFIRMED CAREPLUS STAFFING SERVICES, LLC; JOHN PONTHIE; ROSS PONTHIE; MARK THOMPSON; AND EARNEST JOHNSON IN HIS CAPACITY AS ADMINISTRATOR OF HEARTLAND REHABILITATION AND CARE CENTER APPELLANTS

V.

KEVIN GARRETT AS ATTORNEY-IN- FACT FOR LOTTIE WHITE

APPELLEE

DAVID M. GLOVER, Judge

Progressive Eldercare Services—Saline, Inc., d/b/a Heartland Rehabilitation and Care

Center (“Heartland”) appeals the Saline County Circuit Court’s denial of summary judgment

that it is charitably immune to suit as a matter of law. In this interlocutory appeal, Heartland

contends it is entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law based on the doctrine of

charitable immunity and that appellee Kevin Garrett, as attorney-in-fact his mother, Lottie Cite as 2016 Ark. App. 518

White, failed to rebut its entitlement to charitable immunity. For the reasons stated in

Progressive Eldercare Services-Saline, Inc. v. Cauffiel, 2016 Ark. App. 523, ___ S.W.3d ___,

handed down today, we affirm.

Affirmed.

GRUBER, VAUGHT, HIXSON, and BROWN, JJ., agree.

HARRISON, J., concurs.

BRANDON J. HARRISON, Judge, concurring. I concur for the same reasons

expressed in my concurrence in Progressive Eldercare Services-Saline, Inc. v. Cauffiel, 2016 Ark.

App. 523, ___ S.W.3d. ___, handed down today.

Kutak Rock LLP, by: Mark W. Dossett and Jeff Fletcher, for appellant.

Reddick Moss, PLLC, by: Brian D. Reddick, Robert W. Francis, and Matthew D. Swindle,

for appellee.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2016 Ark. App. 518, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/progressive-eldercare-svcs-saline-inc-v-garrett-arkctapp-2016.