Earls v. Harvest Credit Management VI-B, LLC

I wholeheartedly agree with the majority that we require strict compliance with Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 4. Therefore, I must dissent from the majority’s conclusion that the summons at issue in the present case was 1pdefective because the majority has failed to adhere to the language of Rule 4.

Neither rules of construction nor rules of interpretation may be used to defeat the clear and certain meaning of a rule provision. Solis v. State, 371 Ark. 590, 595, 269 S.W.3d 352, 356 (2007) (citing Sturdivant v. Sturdivant, 367 Ark. 514, 517, 241 S.W.3d 740, 743 (2006)). Further, sendee…