Case Law Incorporators of the Cmty. v. Pulaski Cnty.

Incorporators of the Cmty. v. Pulaski Cnty.

Document Cited Authorities (4) Cited in (3) Related

Quattlebaum, Grooms & Tull PLLC, Little Rock, by: Chad W. Pekron, Mary-Tipton Thalheimer, and R. Seth Hampton, for appellant.

William A. Gruber and Adam Fogleman, for separate appellee Pulaski County.

Wright, Lindsey & Jennings LLP, Little Rock, by: Judy Simmons Henry and Kristen S. Moyers, for separate appellee Central Arkansas Water.

BRANDON J. HARRISON, Judge

"Beware! The Devil is in the details." This warning applies full-force to Arkansas District Court Rule 9, whose reticulated structure continues—with some justification—to bedevil lawyers and courts alike. This appeal presents the most recent example.

The incorporators of the community called Little Italy appeal the Pulaski County Circuit Court's order that dismissed Little Italy's appeal from Pulaski County Court. The circuit court ruled that Little Italy failed to perfect its appeal in accordance with Arkansas District Court Rule 9 (2016). Little Italy disagrees and asks this court to reinstate its case in the circuit court.

Because we will repeatedly refer to Arkansas District Court Rule 9, we reproduce the pertinent parts now:

(b) How Taken From District Court.
(1) A party may take an appeal from a district court by filing with the clerk of the circuit court having jurisdiction of the appeal (i) a certified copy of the district court's docket sheet which shows the entry awarding judgment and all prior entries or a certified copy of the record of the district court proceedings consisting of all documents and motions filed in the district court, and (ii) a certified copy of the complaint filed in the district court or, if filed in accordance with Rule 10 of these rules, a certified copy of the claim form filed in the small claims division of the district court. Neither a notice of appeal nor an order granting leave to appeal shall be required.
The appealing party shall serve upon counsel for all other parties and upon any party not represented by counsel, certified copies of the district court docket sheet or the district court record and a certified copy of the district court complaint or claim form. Service upon counsel or a party not represented by counsel shall be effected as follows:
(A) By sending the copies by any form of mail requiring a signed receipt;
(B) By delivering the copies as described in Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 5(b)(2) ;
(C) By sending the copies by a commercial delivery company as described in Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 5(b)(2) ; or
(D) If service is upon counsel, by sending the copies by electronic transmission as described in Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 5(b)(2). If service is by mail, the signed receipt shall be attached to the certificate of service.
....
(3) If service of the certified copies of the district court docket sheet or record and the complaint or claim form is not made within 120 days after filing the district court complaint or claim form with the circuit court or within the time period established by an extension granted pursuant to this subdivision, the action shall be dismissed without prejudice upon motion or upon the court's initiative. ...
(c) Procedure on Appeal from District Court.
(1) All the parties shall assert all their claims and defenses in circuit court. Within 30 days after a party serves upon counsel for all other parties, and upon any party not represented by counsel, certified copies of the district court docket sheet or district court record and a certified copy of the district court complaint or claim form, the party who was the defendant in district court shall file its answer, motions, and claims within the time and manner prescribed by the Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure and the case shall otherwise proceed in accordance with those rules.
....
(e) Special Provisions For Appeals From County Court to Circuit Court. Unless otherwise provided in this subdivision, the requirements of subdivisions (a), (b), (c), and (d) govern appeals from county court to circuit court. A party may take an appeal from the final judgment of a county court by filing a notice of appeal with the clerk of the circuit court having jurisdiction over the matter within thirty (30) days from the date that the county court filed its order with the county clerk. A certified copy of the county court's final judgment must be attached to the notice of appeal. In the circuit-court proceeding, the party who was the petitioner or plaintiff in county court shall have all the obligations of the plaintiff in a case that has been appealed from district court to circuit court. If there were no defendants in the county-court proceedings, then the petitioner/plaintiff shall name all necessary, adverse parties as defendants in its complaint filed in circuit court.

Ark. Dist. Ct. R. 9(b), (c), (e).

In May 2015, Little Italy filed a petition with the Pulaski County clerk seeking to incorporate itself into a town. In February 2016, the county court denied the petition. Little Italy appealed to the Pulaski County Circuit Court by filing a notice of appeal in the circuit court and attaching a certified copy of the county court's judgment. The notice of appeal named Pulaski County as the only defendant.

Central Arkansas Water moved to intervene in the circuit court. It argued that it was an interested party that had appeared at the county court hearing and owned land within the boundaries of the proposed town. The motion was granted. That same day, Central Arkansas Water moved the circuit court to dismiss Little Italy's notice of appeal because it had failed to timely perfect an appeal and to state its claims. Specifically, Central Arkansas Water argued that Little Italy had failed to comply with District Court Rule 9(b)(3), which requires service of a certified copy of the district court docket sheet or record, and the complaint or claim form, within 120 days. Central Arkansas Water also argued that Little Italy did not satisfy District Court Rule 9(c), which requires that a party make all its claims in circuit court. Pulaski County filed a similar motion to dismiss and adopted Central Arkansas Water's motion.

Little Italy responded that it had properly perfected its appeal pursuant to Rule 9(e) by filing in the circuit court a notice of appeal and a certified copy of the county court's final judgment with the circuit court. Little Italy argued that Rule 9(e)'s filing requirement was in lieu of, not in addition to, subsection (b)'s requirement that an appealing party file either a certified copy of the district court's docket sheet—or a certified copy of the record and either a certified copy of the complaint or the claim form. Little Italy also disagreed that it had failed to sufficiently state its claims in the circuit court, citing Rule 9(b)(1)(D), which provides that the filing of the appeal documents "shall constitute the filing of the complaint for purposes of commencing the action in circuit court in accordance with Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 3(a)." Therefore, Little Italy argued, Rule 9 did not require it to draft and file in the circuit court a new complaint. Little Italy also said that its notice of appeal clearly stated the only claim it pressed in the county court: that the county court judgment should be reversed and that Little Italy should be permitted to incorporate.

Pulaski County replied in the circuit court that Little Italy had the obligation to assert its claims and the bases for its claims and had "butcher[ed]" the language of Rule 9(b)(1)(D), which actually states, "The filing of the certified copy of the district court complaint or claim form with the clerk of the court shall constitute the filing of the complaint for purposes of commencing the action in circuit court in accordance with Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 3(a)." (Emphasis added.) Central Arkansas Water argued that the motion to dismiss should be granted because Little Italy had failed to name all necessary parties (and specifically failed to name Central Arkansas Water) as required by Rule 9(e); failed to serve Central Arkansas as required by Rule 9(b)(1); and failed to attach the county court record to its notice of appeal.

The circuit court held a hearing on 12 October 2017. Much of what was argued to the county court was reargued to the circuit court. We will repeat enough of the second round to make the point. Among other things, Pulaski County argued that Little Italy had failed to set out the basis for the appeal in the form of a complaint or claim form. Central Arkansas Water argued, among other things, that Little Italy had erroneously not included it as a named defendant and that Little Italy had failed to identify its claims in the circuit court as required by Rule 9(c).

Little Italy argued that it perfected its appeal when it filed its notice of appeal with a certified copy of the county court's judgment. It also argued that it did not have an opposing party below but that it named Pulaski County as an adverse party because it was the entity that had determined incorporation was not appropriate. The remainder of its proper-party arguments are variations on a theme. More to this appeal's point, Little Italy told the circuit court that under Rule 9(c)(2), it was not required to file any other part of the county court record because "[t]he only thing we dispute is the final judgement." And again, Little Italy reiterated that even if additional county court documents needed to be filed, it was a procedural issue, not a jurisdictional death knell.

After expressing its concern that the rules governing appeals from district court or county court are "pretty vague," the circuit court found this:

The problem I have is that in 9(
...
1 cases
Document | Arkansas Court of Appeals – 2018
Baumann v. State
"..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
1 cases
Document | Arkansas Court of Appeals – 2018
Baumann v. State
"..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex