Legal Opinion · Dissent

Beason v. Parks

Court of Appeals of Arkansas

Decided April 15, 2015No. CV-14-502Published

1DissentLarry D. Vaught, Judge

While I agree with the majority’s decision that the trial court had personal jurisdiction over Beason, I must dissent because Parks substantially complied with section 9-15-201(e)(2), and Beason waived any statutory irregularity.

112Parks did not strictly comply with section 9-15-201 (e)(2). Her petition was not accompanied by an affidavit that she signed under oath. However, Beason fails to cite authority supporting his position that strict compliance with the statute is required. And other than citing to the general law regarding statutory construction and the presence of the word “shall” in…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Arkansas Department of Human Services v. CouchCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1992
  2. Wulff v. DavisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1913
  3. Reid v. FrazeeCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2001
  4. Worley v. River Oaks Water Improvement District No. 48Court of Appeals of Arkansas · 1999

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

Powered by the Exa API