Case Title: Lee v. Villines

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: arkansas

Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

Date: 1997-04-21T00:00:00Z

Document:
Linda H. LEE, et al. v. F.G. "Buddy"
VILLINES, Pulaski County Judge, et al.

96-817                                             ___ S.W.2d ___

                    Supreme Court of Arkansas
                Opinion delivered April 21, 1997


1.   Appeal & error -- review of trial court's reasoning or findings not
     possible where memorandum opinion was not included in record or abstract. -
     - Where appellants raised four points for reversal of the
     trial court's order of dismissal, the supreme court could not
     conduct a meaningful review of all four arguments because
     neither the transcript nor the abstract contained the trial
     court's memorandum opinion to which the order of dismissal
     referred; the supreme court was left with only the bare
     conclusion to dismiss and therefore could not review the trial
     court's reasoning or any of its findings leading to that
     conclusion.

2.   Courts -- county judge had duty to treat circuit court employees the same
     as other county employees -- executive order accomplished equality of
     treatment -- circuit court did not err in dismissing petition. -- The
     language of Act 286 of 1989 is clear and mandates that circuit
     court employees be treated as other county employees; it was
     appellee county judge's ministerial duty to treat appellants
     the same as all other county employees, and his executive
     order, which directed the county comptroller to deduct either
     vacation time or compensation from each appellant to cover the
     period in which they did not work, accomplished the equality
     of treatment; accordingly, the supreme court concluded,
     appellants did not demonstrate that mandamus should issue to
     direct appellees to rescind the executive order, and the
     circuit court did not err in dismissing the petition.

3.   Appeal & error -- appellant has burden to produce record sufficient for
     appellate review. -- It is the appellant's burden to produce a
     record on appeal sufficient for our review.

4.   Estoppel -- trial court did not err in declining to consider equitable
     estoppel as cause of action -- order of dismissal affirmed. -- Where the
     circuit judge stated from the bench that he interpreted the
     supreme court's earlier decision to transfer the case to
     circuit court as a statement that although equitable estoppel
     may be raised in both equity and law courts, there would be no
     need to transfer to circuit court if this particular claim
     existed in chancery court, the supreme court concluded that
     the circuit judge interpreted its first decision correctly
     and, finding no error in his ruling, affirmed the order of
     dismissal.


     Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court, Sixth Division; John
Lineberger, Judge on Assignment; affirmed.
     The Perroni Law Firm, P.A., by: Samuel A. Perroni, for
appellants.
     Pulaski County Attorney's Office, by: Karla Burnett, Staff
Attorney, for appellees.

     Donald L. Corbin, Justice.
     This is the second appeal of this case, which involves Circuit
Judge Marion Humphrey's granting of administrative leave to
Appellants, Judge Humphrey's secretary, case coordinator, bailiff,
assistant bailiff, probation officer, and law clerk, for the
approximately two-week period in May 1993, when the Pulaski County
Courthouse was being temporarily relocated for renovations. 
Jurisdiction of this appeal is properly in this court pursuant to
Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 1-2(a)(10) (as amended by per curiam July 15,
1996).  We find no merit to the appeal and affirm.
     Appellee, County Judge F.G. "Buddy" Villines, advised Judge
Humphrey that he had been without authority to grant Appellants
administrative leave.  Appellants filed suit in chancery court
against Appellees after Villines had issued an executive order
directing the county comptroller to deduct either vacation time or
compensation from each Appellant to cover the period they did not
work.  Appellants claimed economic loss and denial of due process. 
The chancellor on assignment, John Lineberger, entered a permanent
injunction preventing the comptroller from deducting either
vacation time or compensation from Appellants.  In the first
appeal, Villines v. Lee, 321 Ark. 405,