Case Title: Richardson v. Rodgers

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: arkansas

Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

Date: 1997-07-14T00:00:00Z

Document:
C.W. RICHARDSON, Greg Richardson, 
and CWR Construction, Inc. v. 
Carl and Norlene RODGERS

96-483                                             ___ S.W.2d ___

                    Supreme Court of Arkansas
                 Opinion delivered July 14, 1997


1.   Appeal & error -- failure to comply with ARCP Rule 54(b) is jurisdictional
     issue to be raised by appellate court. -- The failure to comply with
     ARCP Rule 54(b), indicated by the absence of an order
     adjudicating the rights of all parties, is a jurisdictional
     issue that the appellate court is obligated to raise on its
     own.

2.   Appeal & error -- when order is appealable. -- To be final and
     appealable, an order must cover all of the parties and all of
     the claims.

3.   Appeal & error -- when order is not appealable. -- An order is not
     appealable when it fails to mention an intervenor's claim and
     contains no recitation of facts that would allow a piecemeal
     appeal under ARCP Rule 54(b).

4.   Appeal & error -- appellants failed to produce record showing Rule 54(b)
     jurisdictional requirements met -- appeal dismissed. -- Where appellants
     failed to meet their burden of producing a record showing that
     the jurisdictional requirements of ARCP Rule 54(b) had been
     met, the supreme court dismissed the appeal.

     Appeal from White Circuit Court; Bill Mills, Judge; dismissed.
     Anderson & Kilpatrick, by: Randy Murphy, for appellants.
     Boswell, Tucker, Brewster & Hicks, by: Ted Boswell and John T.
Holleman, for appellees.

     David Newbern, Justice.
     This is an appeal from a default judgment.  The appeal is
dismissed for failure to comply with Ark. R. Civ. P. 54(b).
     Carl Rodgers alleged he was seriously injured by a falling
water pipe while working on renovation of the Pulaski County
Courthouse.  Mr. Rodgers was employed by IK Electric Service Co.,
a subcontractor on the project.  Mr. Rodgers and his wife, Norlene
Rodgers, brought a negligence action to recover damages resulting
from his injury and Ms. Rodgers's loss of consortium.  The
defendants were C.W. Richardson, Greg Richardson, CWR Construction,
Inc. (referred to collectively as "CWR"), and Central Arkansas Risk
Management ("CARM").  CWR Construction, Inc., was named as the
prime contractor.  The action against CARM was a direct action
against the County's insurer.   
     In a timely answer, CARM denied liability.  American States
Insurance Company ("American"), the workers' compensation insurance
carrier for IK Electric Service Co., filed a motion to intervene
and a complaint in intervention.  CWR failed to answer, and a
default judgment was entered against them.  A hearing was held on
damages only, and awards totaling $1,450,000 and $50,000 were
awarded to Mr. and Mrs. Rodgers, respectively, against CWR.    
     Based on its contention that CARM's answer denying negligence
inured to CWR's benefit, and thus that there had been no default,
CWR moved to set the default judgment aside pursuant to Ark. R.
Civ. P. 55(c). 
     American's intervention complaint sought subrogation to the
rights of Mr. Rodgers against the defendants.  It stated that
American had paid Mr. Rodgers $10,783.95 in medical payments and
$19,192.42 in temporary total disability and permanent disability
payments.  The complaint also alleged that the payments to Mr.
Rodgers were for the injuries he received due to CWR's negligence. 
The record does not disclose the disposition of American's claim. 
     The parties have not raised the question of the finality of
the judgment or the failure to comply with Rule 54(b).  When
counsel were asked about the matter during oral argument, the
response was that the claim of American was only a subrogation
matter somehow subsumed in the position taken by the Rodgerses.
     While it is true that American and the Rodgerses are on the
same side vis--vis CWR and CARM, that is not so as between them,
and we have no idea whether American's intervention claim was
adjudicated.
     The failure to comply with Rule 54(b), indicated by the
absence of an order adjudicating the rights of all parties, is a
jurisdictional issue that we are obligated to raise on our own. 
Maroney v. City of Malvern, 317 Ark. 177,