Title: Chickasaw Chemical Company v. Thom E. Beasley, Administrator et al.

State: arkansas

Issuer: Arkansas Supreme Court

Document:

CHICKASAW CHEMICAL COMPANY v. Thom E.
BEASLEY, Administrator of the Estate of Harry
Beasley, Deceased, Vance Beasley, D/B/A
Beasley & Son, a Partnership

97-375                                             ___ S.W.2d ___

                    Supreme Court of Arkansas
                  Opinion delivered May 5, 1997


1.   Appeal & error -- notice of appeal not timely filed --
     judgment was nullity. -- The notice of appeal was not timely
     filed in this matter; the first notice of appeal was filed on
     October 2, 1996, before judgment was entered and, thus, was a
     nullity; a notice of appeal was required to be filed within
     thirty days from the date the order was entered on October 8,
     1996, and was not done. 

2.   Appeal & error -- neither notice of appeal nor motion for
     extension timely filed -- motion to dismiss appeal granted. --
     Where appellant should have been aware of the deemed-denied
     date for its posttrial motions and the fact that a notice of
     appeal was required to be filed within thirty days from that
     date, yet neither a notice of appeal nor a motion for
     extension of time was timely filed, the narrow exception set
     out in Ark. R. App. P.--Civ. 4(a) did not apply; the motion to
     dismiss was granted.

     
     Motion to dismiss appeal; granted.
     William P. Rainey, for appellant.
     Easley, Hicky, Cline & Hudson, by:  Preston G. Hicky, for
appellees.
     
     Per Curiam.
     Appellees, Tom E. Beasley, Executor of the Estate of Harry
Beasley, Deceased, and Vance Beasley, d/b/a Beasley & Son, a
Partnership (Beasley), move the court for a dismissal of the appeal
filed by appellant, Chickasaw Chemical Company.  The motion is
premised on the fact that the first notice of appeal filed by
Chickasaw Chemical was not timely and that the motion for extension
of time was also untimely.  We agree with Beasley on both counts
and grant the motion.
     On September 6, 1996, judgment was entered in this matter in
favor of Beasley.  On September 16, 1996, Chickasaw Chemical filed
motions for a new trial and for a judgment notwithstanding the
verdict.  On September 30, 1996, the motions were denied by the
trial court in open court.  On October 2, 1996, Chickasaw Chemical
filed its notice of appeal.
     On October 8, 1996, the order denying Chickasaw Chemical's
motions for new trial and for judgment notwithstanding the verdict
was entered by the trial court.  On November 18, 1996, Chickasaw
Chemical moved for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal. 
The motion for an extension was heard by the trial court, and on
December 2, 1996, an order was entered by the trial court denying
the motion.  On December 3, 1996, Chickasaw Chemical filed a second
notice of appeal from the original judgment, the order denying the
post-judgment motions, and the order denying the extension of time
in which to file an appeal.
     The notice of appeal was not timely filed in this matter.  The
first notice of appeal was filed on October 2, 1996, before
judgment was entered and, thus, was a nullity.  Kimble v. Gray, 313
Ark. 373,