Hunter v. Video Real Estate Agency, Inc.

Summary

The Arkansas Supreme Court considered the Hunters’ motion for a rule on the clerk after the clerk refused to file their tendered appellate record. The court held that the appeal was timely as to the order denying their motion to vacate or obtain a new trial and as to the deemed denial of their Rule 52(b) motion, but untimely as to the underlying judgment; it therefore granted the motion in part, denied it in part, and directed the clerk to file the record.

Holdings

1. A motion to vacate and for a new trial filed within one year of the judgment was timely under Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 60(c)(1), and the Hunters' notice of appeal filed within thirty days after denial of that motion was timely as to the order denying the motion.
2. The Hunters' notice of appeal was untimely and ineffective to appeal the underlying judgment because their motion to vacate and for a new trial was not filed within ten days after entry of that judgment and therefore did not extend the time for appeal.
3. The record was timely tendered, and the amended notice of appeal was timely as to the deemed denial of the motion for additional findings of fact; therefore, the Clerk was directed to file the record.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Hunters' notice of appeal was timely as to the circuit court's order denying their motion to vacate and for a new trial.
2. Whether the Hunters' notice of appeal was timely and effective to appeal the underlying December 21, 2001 judgment.
3. Whether the record was timely tendered for filing and whether the Supreme Court Clerk should be directed to file it.
4. Whether the amended notice of appeal was timely as to the deemed denial of the Rule 52(b) motion for additional findings of fact.

Disposition

other