Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-4_06-cv-00376/USCOURTS-ared-4_06-cv-00376-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 380
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Property Damage
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Property Damage

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

WESTERN DIVISION

SHANE SMITH ENTERPRISES, INC. PLAINTIFF

v. No. 4:06CV00376 JLH

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. DEFENDANT

ORDER

Shane Smith Enterprises, Inc., has filed a motion to reconsider this Court’s June 29, 2007,

Opinion and Order denying Shane Smith Enterprises’ motion for partial summary judgment and

granting in part and denying in part Bank of America’s motion for summary judgment. Shane Smith

Enterprises asks this Court to reconsider its holding that the account name “Melvin Lewis Walker

DBA S. Smith Enterprises” is not substantially similar to “Shane Smith Enterprises” or “Shane

Smith Enterpri.” That issue was fully explored in the Court’s June 29 Opinion and Order and will

not be revisited here. Shane Smith Enterprises also contends that the Court erred in finding that

Shane Smith Enterprises’ claim for common-law conversion was governed by § 4-3-405(b) of the

Arkansas Code. Shane Smith Enterprises’ argument cannot be squared with the plain text of § 4-3-

405(b): 

For the purpose of determining the rights and liabilities of a person who, in good

faith, pays an instrument or takes it for value or for collection, if an employer

entrusted an employee with responsibility with respect to the instrument and the

employee or a person acting in concert with the employee makes a fraudulent

indorsement of the instrument, the indorsement is effective as the indorsement of the

person to whom the instrument is payable if it is made in the name of that person.

ARK. CODE ANN. § 4-3-405(b) (emphasis added). “To establish liability for the tort of conversion,

a plaintiff must prove that the defendant wrongfully committed a distinct act of dominion over the

property of another, which is a denial of or is inconsistent with the owner’s rights.” Hatchell v.

Case 4:06-cv-00376-JLH Document 78 Filed 07/10/07 Page 1 of 2
2

Wren, 363 Ark. 107, 116-117, 211 S.W.3d 516, 521 (2005). Where § 4-3-405(b) applies, there is

no possession that is “a denial of” or “inconsistent with” the payee owner’s rights because “the

indorsement is effective as the indorsement of the person to whom the instrument is payable.” ARK.

CODE ANN. § 4-3-405(b). Shane Smith Enterprises’ motion to reconsider is DENIED. Document

#74.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 10th day of July, 2007.

J. LEON HOLMES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:06-cv-00376-JLH Document 78 Filed 07/10/07 Page 2 of 2