Summary
The Supreme Court of Arkansas affirmed a civil-contempt order against attorney Eddie Christian for willfully violating a circuit-court order barring discovery. The court held that the order clearly prohibited both outstanding and future discovery, including discovery initiated after the filing of an amended complaint. The court declined to reach Christian’s judicial-bias argument because he had not objected or moved for recusal below.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the circuit court's June 26 order was sufficiently definite and clear to support a contempt finding for issuing new subpoenas after an amended complaint was filed.
- Whether Christian's claim that the circuit judge exhibited the appearance of bias and actual bias was preserved for appellate review without an objection or motion for recusal.
Holdings
- The June 26 order was definite in its terms and clear as to the duties it imposed; it barred all discovery, including new discovery, notwithstanding the filing of an amended complaint. Christian's intentional and willful violation therefore supported the civil-contempt finding.
- A claim of judicial bias is not preserved for appellate review when the party made neither an objection based on the judge's bias nor a motion for recusal.
Key quotations
“The circuit court's order clearly stayed all outstanding discovery and barred all future discovery.” (288 S.W.3d at 198)
“The order itself and the circuit court's comments plainly demonstrate that the order was intended to constitute a complete bar on all discovery.” (288 S.W.3d at 198)
Factual background
The circuit court entered an order stating that no discovery should be conducted and that all outstanding discovery was stayed indefinitely pending further orders. After Terry filed an amended complaint, attorney Eddie Christian issued four additional subpoenas, obtained more than 800 emails, and released the evidence to a newspaper and others without providing the required deposition notices. The circuit court found that Christian intentionally and willfully violated its discovery-bar order and held him in civil contempt.
Procedural history
Terry filed a complaint against White and Sugg asserting mandamus, breach-of-contract, breach-of-fiduciary-duty, and illegal-exaction claims. The circuit court dismissed some claims with prejudice on sovereign-immunity grounds and dismissed the remaining claims without prejudice, while barring all discovery indefinitely. After Christian issued additional subpoenas and obtained and disseminated documents, the circuit court found him in civil contempt. Christian appealed, and the Supreme Court of Arkansas affirmed.