Legal Opinion · Dissent

United Parcel Service, Inc. v. Pridgen Security, Inc.

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided April 20, 1987No. 86-237Published

1DissentSteele Hays, Justice

I respectfully disagree with the majority. The only reason an order of dismissal as to one of several defendants is not ordinarily appealable under ARCP Rule 54(b) is because other defendants remain and the litigation is not disposed of and piecemeal appeals would result. Tulio v. Arkansas Blue Cross & Blue Shield, 283 Ark. 278, 675 S.W.2d 369 (1984).

Pridgen Security, Inc. has been dismissed from the action under ARCP Rule 12(b)(6) and Wanda Sue Beard has been dismissed by virtue of a settlement. Thus, if United Parcel Service, Inc., cannot appeal from the order of dismissal as to Pridgen…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Ratliff v. MossSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1984
  2. Tulio v. Arkansas Blue Cross & Blue Shield, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1984
  3. Aclin Ford Co. v. Fiat Motors of North America, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1982

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API