Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Branch v. Branch
Date: 01-18-2022
Case Number: s2015 Ark. App. 712
Judge: RAYMOND R. ABRAMSON
Court:
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
On appeal from The SALINE
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
Plaintiff's Attorney:
Little Rock. AR - Best Divorce Lawyer Directory
Defendant's Attorney:
Little Rock. AR - Best Divorce Lawyer Directory
Tell MoreLaw About Your Litigation Successes and MoreLaw Will Tell the World.
Re: MoreLaw National Jury Verdict and Settlement
Counselor:
MoreLaw collects and publishes civil and criminal litigation information from the state and federal courts nationwide. Publication is free and access to the information is free to the public.
MoreLaw will publish litigation reports submitted by you free of charge
Info@MoreLaw.com - 855-853-4800
Description:
Little Rock, AR - Divorce lawyer represented appellee with resolving issues related to the premarital agreement.
Quinn and Jimmy Branch were married on July 25, 2003. They executed a premarital
agreement prior to the marriage. In January 2014, Quinn filed a complaint for divorce. In
her complaint, she sought to have the premarital agreement declared unconscionable and
void pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 9-11-406. Jimmy answered Quinn's
complaint for divorce denying that the premarital agreement was void; he also
counterclaimed for divorce.
The trial court held a final divorce hearing in September 2014. Following the hearing
Cite as 2015 Ark. App. 712
and post trial briefing, the court issued a letter opinion in October 2014 outlining its ruling.
On November 19, 2014, a decree of divorce memorializing the trial court's findings was
entered. The divorce decree was not a final order for appellate purposes. The parties
recognized this fact and the effect it had on their ability to appeal. Consequently, the trial
court executed a Rule 54(b) certificate on December 11, 2014, so that an immediate appeal
could commence. The 54(b) certificate was filed separately from the divorce decree and
more than three weeks after the decree had been entered of record. Jimmy appealed the
trial court's divorce decree in a notice of appeal filed on December 17, 2014.1
Although neither party raises the issue of finality, the court must necessarily address
it because it affects our jurisdiction over the appeal. Crockett v. C.A.G. Invs., Inc., 2010 Ark.
90, 361 S.W.3d 262. The presence of a Rule 54(b) certificate is necessary to grant finality
to a judgment that otherwise would not be final under our rules. In order for this court to
acquire jurisdiction over an appeal, a trial court's certificate must comply with the
requirements of Rule 54, and in the present appeal, we cannot reach the merits because of
noncompliance.
Rule 54(b)(1) provides, in pertinent part, that the certificate "shall appear immediately
after the court's signature on the judgment.†Here, the certificate does not immediately
follow the court's signature. Instead, it was filed independent of the trial court's divorce
decree and several weeks after the decree was entered. While we recognize that this
1
Jimmy later filed an amended notice of appeal on February 2, 2015, challenging the
divorce decree and the denial of his motion to reconsider.
2
Cite as 2015 Ark. App. 712
deficiency may seem minor, we are nevertheless constrained to dismiss because the plain
language of Rule 54(b) requires that the certificate shall be located on the judgment
immediately after the court's signature, and our supreme court has construed the word
"shall†when used in our Rules of Civil Procedure to mean that compliance is mandatory.
Loyd v. Knight, 288 Ark. 474, 706 S.W.2d 393 (1986). Additionally, this type of deficiency
is significant and potentially problematic because the certificate establishes the identity of the
order appealed from and the date from which to calculate the deadline for filing the notice
of appeal.2 See Watkins v. City of Paragould, 2013 Ark. App. 539.
Outcome:
We conclude that this appeal must be dismissed for lack of a final and appealable order because the 54(b) certificate is deficient.
Dismissed without prejudice
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
About This Case
What was the outcome of Branch v. Branch?
The outcome was: We conclude that this appeal must be dismissed for lack of a final and appealable order because the 54(b) certificate is deficient.
Dismissed without prejudice
Which court heard Branch v. Branch?
This case was heard in <center><h4><b>ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS </b> <br>
<font color="green"><i>On appeal from The SALINE
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT </i></font></center></h4>, AR. The presiding judge was RAYMOND R. ABRAMSON.
Who were the attorneys in Branch v. Branch?
Plaintiff's attorney: Little Rock. AR - Best Divorce Lawyer Directory. Defendant's attorney: Little Rock. AR - Best Divorce Lawyer Directory
Tell MoreLaw About Your Litigation Successes and MoreLaw Will Tell the World.
Re: MoreLaw National Jury Verdict and Settlement
Counselor:
MoreLaw collects and publishes civil and criminal litigation information from the state and federal courts nationwide. Publication is free and access to the information is free to the public.
MoreLaw will publish litigation reports submitted by you free of charge
Info@MoreLaw.com - 855-853-4800.
When was Branch v. Branch decided?
This case was decided on January 18, 2022.
Little Rock. AR - Best Divorce Lawyer Directory
Defendant's Attorney:
Little Rock. AR - Best Divorce Lawyer Directory
Tell MoreLaw About Your Litigation Successes and MoreLaw Will Tell the World.
Re: MoreLaw National Jury Verdict and Settlement
Counselor:
MoreLaw collects and publishes civil and criminal litigation information from the state and federal courts nationwide. Publication is free and access to the information is free to the public.
MoreLaw will publish litigation reports submitted by you free of charge
Info@MoreLaw.com - 855-853-4800
Description:
Little Rock, AR - Divorce lawyer represented appellee with resolving issues related to the premarital agreement.
Quinn and Jimmy Branch were married on July 25, 2003. They executed a premarital
agreement prior to the marriage. In January 2014, Quinn filed a complaint for divorce. In
her complaint, she sought to have the premarital agreement declared unconscionable and
void pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 9-11-406. Jimmy answered Quinn's
complaint for divorce denying that the premarital agreement was void; he also
counterclaimed for divorce.
The trial court held a final divorce hearing in September 2014. Following the hearing
Cite as 2015 Ark. App. 712
and post trial briefing, the court issued a letter opinion in October 2014 outlining its ruling.
On November 19, 2014, a decree of divorce memorializing the trial court's findings was
entered. The divorce decree was not a final order for appellate purposes. The parties
recognized this fact and the effect it had on their ability to appeal. Consequently, the trial
court executed a Rule 54(b) certificate on December 11, 2014, so that an immediate appeal
could commence. The 54(b) certificate was filed separately from the divorce decree and
more than three weeks after the decree had been entered of record. Jimmy appealed the
trial court's divorce decree in a notice of appeal filed on December 17, 2014.1
Although neither party raises the issue of finality, the court must necessarily address
it because it affects our jurisdiction over the appeal. Crockett v. C.A.G. Invs., Inc., 2010 Ark.
90, 361 S.W.3d 262. The presence of a Rule 54(b) certificate is necessary to grant finality
to a judgment that otherwise would not be final under our rules. In order for this court to
acquire jurisdiction over an appeal, a trial court's certificate must comply with the
requirements of Rule 54, and in the present appeal, we cannot reach the merits because of
noncompliance.
Rule 54(b)(1) provides, in pertinent part, that the certificate "shall appear immediately
after the court's signature on the judgment.†Here, the certificate does not immediately
follow the court's signature. Instead, it was filed independent of the trial court's divorce
decree and several weeks after the decree was entered. While we recognize that this
1
Jimmy later filed an amended notice of appeal on February 2, 2015, challenging the
divorce decree and the denial of his motion to reconsider.
2
Cite as 2015 Ark. App. 712
deficiency may seem minor, we are nevertheless constrained to dismiss because the plain
language of Rule 54(b) requires that the certificate shall be located on the judgment
immediately after the court's signature, and our supreme court has construed the word
"shall†when used in our Rules of Civil Procedure to mean that compliance is mandatory.
Loyd v. Knight, 288 Ark. 474, 706 S.W.2d 393 (1986). Additionally, this type of deficiency
is significant and potentially problematic because the certificate establishes the identity of the
order appealed from and the date from which to calculate the deadline for filing the notice
of appeal.2 See Watkins v. City of Paragould, 2013 Ark. App. 539.
Outcome:
We conclude that this appeal must be dismissed for lack of a final and appealable order because the 54(b) certificate is deficient.
Dismissed without prejudice
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
About This Case
What was the outcome of Branch v. Branch?
The outcome was: We conclude that this appeal must be dismissed for lack of a final and appealable order because the 54(b) certificate is deficient.
Dismissed without prejudice
Which court heard Branch v. Branch?
This case was heard in <center><h4><b>ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS </b> <br>
<font color="green"><i>On appeal from The SALINE
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT </i></font></center></h4>, AR. The presiding judge was RAYMOND R. ABRAMSON.
Who were the attorneys in Branch v. Branch?
Plaintiff's attorney: Little Rock. AR - Best Divorce Lawyer Directory. Defendant's attorney: Little Rock. AR - Best Divorce Lawyer Directory
Tell MoreLaw About Your Litigation Successes and MoreLaw Will Tell the World.
Re: MoreLaw National Jury Verdict and Settlement
Counselor:
MoreLaw collects and publishes civil and criminal litigation information from the state and federal courts nationwide. Publication is free and access to the information is free to the public.
MoreLaw will publish litigation reports submitted by you free of charge
Info@MoreLaw.com - 855-853-4800.
When was Branch v. Branch decided?
This case was decided on January 18, 2022.
Little Rock. AR - Best Divorce Lawyer Directory
Tell MoreLaw About Your Litigation Successes and MoreLaw Will Tell the World.
Re: MoreLaw National Jury Verdict and Settlement
Counselor:
MoreLaw collects and publishes civil and criminal litigation information from the state and federal courts nationwide. Publication is free and access to the information is free to the public.
MoreLaw will publish litigation reports submitted by you free of charge
Info@MoreLaw.com - 855-853-4800
Little Rock, AR - Divorce lawyer represented appellee with resolving issues related to the premarital agreement.
Quinn and Jimmy Branch were married on July 25, 2003. They executed a premarital
agreement prior to the marriage. In January 2014, Quinn filed a complaint for divorce. In
her complaint, she sought to have the premarital agreement declared unconscionable and
void pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 9-11-406. Jimmy answered Quinn's
complaint for divorce denying that the premarital agreement was void; he also
counterclaimed for divorce.
The trial court held a final divorce hearing in September 2014. Following the hearing
Cite as 2015 Ark. App. 712
and post trial briefing, the court issued a letter opinion in October 2014 outlining its ruling.
On November 19, 2014, a decree of divorce memorializing the trial court's findings was
entered. The divorce decree was not a final order for appellate purposes. The parties
recognized this fact and the effect it had on their ability to appeal. Consequently, the trial
court executed a Rule 54(b) certificate on December 11, 2014, so that an immediate appeal
could commence. The 54(b) certificate was filed separately from the divorce decree and
more than three weeks after the decree had been entered of record. Jimmy appealed the
trial court's divorce decree in a notice of appeal filed on December 17, 2014.1
Although neither party raises the issue of finality, the court must necessarily address
it because it affects our jurisdiction over the appeal. Crockett v. C.A.G. Invs., Inc., 2010 Ark.
90, 361 S.W.3d 262. The presence of a Rule 54(b) certificate is necessary to grant finality
to a judgment that otherwise would not be final under our rules. In order for this court to
acquire jurisdiction over an appeal, a trial court's certificate must comply with the
requirements of Rule 54, and in the present appeal, we cannot reach the merits because of
noncompliance.
Rule 54(b)(1) provides, in pertinent part, that the certificate "shall appear immediately
after the court's signature on the judgment.†Here, the certificate does not immediately
follow the court's signature. Instead, it was filed independent of the trial court's divorce
decree and several weeks after the decree was entered. While we recognize that this
1
Jimmy later filed an amended notice of appeal on February 2, 2015, challenging the
divorce decree and the denial of his motion to reconsider.
2
Cite as 2015 Ark. App. 712
deficiency may seem minor, we are nevertheless constrained to dismiss because the plain
language of Rule 54(b) requires that the certificate shall be located on the judgment
immediately after the court's signature, and our supreme court has construed the word
"shall†when used in our Rules of Civil Procedure to mean that compliance is mandatory.
Loyd v. Knight, 288 Ark. 474, 706 S.W.2d 393 (1986). Additionally, this type of deficiency
is significant and potentially problematic because the certificate establishes the identity of the
order appealed from and the date from which to calculate the deadline for filing the notice
of appeal.2 See Watkins v. City of Paragould, 2013 Ark. App. 539.
Dismissed without prejudice
About This Case
What was the outcome of Branch v. Branch?
The outcome was: We conclude that this appeal must be dismissed for lack of a final and appealable order because the 54(b) certificate is deficient. Dismissed without prejudice
Which court heard Branch v. Branch?
This case was heard in <center><h4><b>ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS </b> <br> <font color="green"><i>On appeal from The SALINE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT </i></font></center></h4>, AR. The presiding judge was RAYMOND R. ABRAMSON.
Who were the attorneys in Branch v. Branch?
Plaintiff's attorney: Little Rock. AR - Best Divorce Lawyer Directory. Defendant's attorney: Little Rock. AR - Best Divorce Lawyer Directory Tell MoreLaw About Your Litigation Successes and MoreLaw Will Tell the World. Re: MoreLaw National Jury Verdict and Settlement Counselor: MoreLaw collects and publishes civil and criminal litigation information from the state and federal courts nationwide. Publication is free and access to the information is free to the public. MoreLaw will publish litigation reports submitted by you free of charge Info@MoreLaw.com - 855-853-4800.
When was Branch v. Branch decided?
This case was decided on January 18, 2022.