Cite as 2016 Ark. App. 548

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION III 

No. CV-16-247

BARBARA MOORE AND

BRUCE MOORE

 APPELLANTS 

V.

ALL SAINTS ANGLICAN CHURCH

 APPELLEE

Opinion Delivered: November 16, 2016

APPEAL FROM THE UNION 

COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT

[NO. CV-2012-0149-6] 

HONORABLE DAVID F. GUTHRIE, 

JUDGE

DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE 

BART F. VIRDEN, Judge

This is an appeal of an order for summary judgment in a quiet-title action. Appellants 

Barbara Moore and Bruce Moore (the Moores) purchased certain mineral interests at a tax 

sale, and several years after their purchase, they filed a lawsuit seeking to quiet title to these 

mineral interests. The ultimate result of that litigation was an order for summary judgment 

in favor of All Saints Anglican Church (All Saints)—a devisee of one of the previous 

landowners. Because we lack a final order, we do not reach the merits of the Moores’ 

appeal of the order granting summary judgment. 

I. Background

The procedural background in this case is somewhat complicated. This litigation 

involves two companion cases, CV-2012-0149-6 and CV-2012-335-2. The circuit court 

ultimately consolidated these cases into CV-2012-0149-6.
Cite as 2016 Ark. App. 548

2 

In June 2012, the Moores filed a petition to quiet title against George W. Warwick, 

Jr.,1 and Robert W. Wakefield; the case was assigned case number CV-2012-149-6. In this 

lawsuit, the Moores alleged that Warwick and Wakefield were the record title owners of 

certain mineral interests until 1989 when, after failing to pay royalty taxes on the mineral 

interests, they forfeited them to the state of Arkansas. Thereafter, the Moores purchased 

the mineral interests at a tax sale held by the Arkansas State Land Commissioner. The 

Moores filed this lawsuit seeking an order to quiet title to the mineral interests. 

In December 2012, the Moores filed a similar quiet-title action, and that case was 

assigned case number CV-2012-335-02. In this case, the Moores sued George W. 

Warwick, Jr., Mildred Wright Pitts, Beverly W. Diboll, Cora Bryan McRae, E.I. 

Newblock, and Lucille J. Rowen McNellie. Again, the Moores alleged that they were the 

legal owners of certain mineral interests based on their purchase of the mineral interests at a 

state tax sale. 

In each of these lawsuits, the circuit court entered a default judgment. After the 

entry of the default judgments, the litigation became more difficult. To begin, Atlanta 

Exploration Company filed motions to intervene in both cases, and the circuit court granted 

its requests. Atlanta Exploration Company is the operator of wells that produce oil and gas 

and pays royalties on their production. Atlanta Exploration Company intervened to ensure 

that it had paid the rightful owners any oil and gas royalties. Another entity, F&G 

Investments, also filed a motion to intervene that was granted. In its complaint in 

 1

Warwick and his devisee, All Saints, are the primary focus of this litigation. 

 
Cite as 2016 Ark. App. 548

3 

intervention, F&G Investments alleged that it was an owner of certain mineral interests. 

Additionally, All Saints, the sole devisee of George W. Warwick, Jr., moved to be 

substituted for Warwick in both actions; this request was also granted. 

Following the addition and substitution of these parties, Atlanta Exploration 

Company filed a motion to set aside the default judgments in both cases.2

 Notably, the 

motion does not specify the parties to which the default judgments should be set aside. It 

merely asks that the judgments be set aside. The circuit court granted the relief sought and 

set aside the default judgments. The orders setting aside the default judgments do not specify 

which, if any, parties are unaffected by this order. 

Following the entry of the orders setting aside default judgments, these cases were 

consolidated into case number CV-2012-0149-6, and All Saints filed a motion for summary 

judgment. All Saints sought summary judgment based on Arkansas Code Annotated section 

22-6-502(b) (Repl. 2004) and the theory of adverse possession. All Saints requested that it 

be found entitled to any funds held by Atlanta Exploration Company. The circuit court 

held a hearing on the motions and ultimately granted summary judgment in favor of All 

Saints on December 2, 2015. In that order, the circuit court found that All Saints was the 

rightful owner of all funds related to royalties on mineral interests that it owned. The order 

did not adjudicate the interests owned by other previously named defendants. The circuit 

court also held that All Saints’ alternative basis for relief, adverse possession, was moot. The 

 2

All Saints filed its own motion to set aside the default judgment in CV-2012-335-

02 wherein it adopted the arguments of Atlanta Exploration Company. 
Cite as 2016 Ark. App. 548

4 

order did not specifically address or dispose of the Moores’ quiet-title action. Nor did it 

address the Moores’ claims against all remaining parties. The Moores appealed. 

II. Jurisdiction

For an order to be final and appealable, it must dismiss the parties from the court, 

discharge them from the action, or conclude their rights to the subject matter in controversy. 

Bayird v. Floyd, 2009 Ark. 455, 344 S.W.3d 80. It is not enough to dismiss some of the 

parties; the order must cover all parties and all claims in order to be final and appealable. Id. 

The order for summary judgment presents two jurisdictional issues that preclude our 

court from exercising jurisdiction. First, the order fails to dispose of the rights of all parties. 

Specifically, the order adjudicates only the claim of All Saints and does not address the rights 

of Robert W. Wakefield, Mildred Wright Pitts, Beverly W. Diboll, Cora Bryan McRae, 

E.I. Newblock, or Lucille J. Rowen McNellie. Additionally, the order fails to specifically 

address the Moores’ original petitions to quiet title. For these reasons, we must dismiss the

appeal without prejudice. 

In the interest of judicial economy, we also take this opportunity to mention a 

briefing deficiency that must be cured if this case returns to our court. Our rules require 

that the addendum contain copies of the nontranscript documents in the record on appeal 

that are essential for the appellate court to confirm its jurisdiction, to understand the case, 

and to decide the issues on appeal. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(a)(8). The order granting summary 

judgment lists F&G Investments as an intervenor in this case and also references the rights 

and obligations of F&G Investments. Nowhere in the addendum are there any other 
Cite as 2016 Ark. App. 548

5 

documents pertaining to F&G Investments. The pleadings relating to F&G Investments are

necessary to understand the case and must be included in any subsequent appeal. 

Dismissed without prejudice. 

GLOVER and WHITEAKER, JJ., agree. 

Crane, Butler & Phillips, P.A., by: David F. Butler, for appellants.

Henry C. Kinslow, for appellee.

 
Cite as 2016 Ark. App. 548

6