Summary
The Arkansas Court of Appeals held that service on Oak Truck Lines was not perfected under Arkansas's long-arm statute because the plaintiff failed to send notice of service and a copy of the process by certified mail. Because service was not made within 120 days and no timely extension was requested, the court held that the default judgment was void and that the action must be dismissed without prejudice. The court reversed the circuit court's orders denying Oak Truck's motion to set aside the default judgment and motion to dismiss.
Holdings
- Oak Truck preserved its service-of-process arguments because the circuit court's blanket denial orders encompassed all issues presented in Oak Truck's motions and supporting arguments.
- Service was not perfected because Arkansas Code Annotated section 16-58-120(b)(2)(B) required Arcap to send Oak Truck, by certified mail, notice of service and a copy of the process at its last known address, and Arcap admittedly did not do so.
- The default judgment was void, and the circuit court was required to dismiss the action without prejudice because service was not perfected within 120 days of filing the complaint and no timely motion to extend the service period was filed.
Questions Presented
- Whether Oak Truck preserved its service-of-process arguments for appeal despite the circuit court's blanket denial orders.
- Whether Arkansas Code Annotated section 16-58-120(b)(2) required Arcap to send Oak Truck notice of service and a copy of the process by certified mail to perfect service.
- Whether the default judgment was void and the action had to be dismissed when service was not perfected within 120 days and no timely extension was sought.
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded
Cases Cited (17)
- Smith v. Sidney Moncrief Pontiac, Buick, GMC Co., 353 Ark. 701, 120 S.W.3d 525 (2003)(followed)
- Carruth v. Design Interiors, Inc., 324 Ark. 373, 921 S.W.2d 944 (1996)(followed)
- Thompson v. Potlatch Corp., 326 Ark. 244, 930 S.W.2d 355 (1996)(followed)
- Williams v. Stant U.S.A. Corp., 2015 Ark. App. 180, 458 S.W.3d 755(followed)
- Sloop v. Kiker, 2016 Ark. App. 125, at 4, 484 S.W.3d 696, 699(followed)
- Ark. Dep't of Hum. Servs. v. Ft. Smith Sch. Dist., 2015 Ark. 81, 455 S.W.3d 294(followed)
- Asset Acceptance, LLC v. Newby, 2014 Ark. 280, 437 S.W.3d 119(followed)
- Hardin v. Bishop, 2013 Ark. 395, 430 S.W.3d 49(followed)
- Eliasnik v. Y&S Pine Bluff, LLC, 2018 Ark. App. 138, at 16, 546 S.W.3d 497, 506(followed)
- Dachs v. Hendrix, 2009 Ark. 542, 354 S.W.3d 95(followed)
Showing top 10 of 17.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…