Cite as 2017 Ark. App. 187 

1 

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION IV 

No. CV-16-676

DERAN FORD, AS 

ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE 

OF HERMAN P. FORD, DECEASED, 

AND AS NEXT FRIEND ON BEHALF 

OF INDYIA FORD, A MINOR 

APPELLANT

V.

NATASHA MILOJKOVIC, M.D., 

MATTHEW STELIGA, M.D., 

THADDEUS BARTTER, M.D., 

TEKA BARTTER, A.P.N., AND KYLE 

KALKWARF, M.D.1

 

APPELLEES 

Opinion Delivered March 29, 2017

APPEAL FROM THE PULASKI

COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, SIXTH 

DIVISION 

[NO. 60CV-14-4086] 

HONORABLE TIMOTHY DAVIS 

FOX, JUDGE 

DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE 

BRANDON J. HARRISON, JUDGE

Deran Ford, as administrator of the estate of Herman P. Ford, and as next friend on 

behalf of Indyia Ford, a minor, appeals the Pulaski County Circuit Court’s grant of summary 

judgment in favor of several doctor defendants. We dismiss the appeal without prejudice 

for lack of a final, appealable order. 

On 26 September 2011, Herman Ford visited the emergency room (ER) at the 

University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS) for treatment of a chronic cough. A 

 1

We note that Thaddeus Bartter, M.D., and Teka Bartter, A.P.N., are not proper 

appellees in this appeal, because Ford has not asserted any error on appeal in their dismissal 

from the case. We also note that Ford does assert error in the grant of summary judgment 

to Dr. Angela Pennisi, but she was not listed as an appellee. 
Cite as 2017 Ark. App. 187 

2 

chest x-ray revealed a tumor in his chest, and the ER physician recommended that Ford be 

further evaluated by an oncologist and that a chest CT be performed. Over the next year, 

Ford was seen by several physicians and underwent chemotherapy treatment. In October 

2012, he returned to UAMS and was hospitalized for twelve days due to his poor nutritional 

status. He was discharged on October 24 but returned to the ER on October 29 suffering 

from chest palpitations, shortness of breath, pneumonia, and severe dehydration. He later 

went into cardiac arrest and died on 1 November 2012. 

On 24 October 2014, Deran Ford, Herman Ford’s brother, filed a complaint in the 

Pulaski County Circuit Court alleging negligence and malpractice in Herman’s diagnosis 

and care. Ford’s complaint named eight doctors, a nurse practitioner, UAMS, the 

University of Arkansas system (UA), and John Does 1–10. Between March 2015 and May 

2016, all named parties except UA were either dismissed or granted summary judgment. 

Deran has now appealed the summary judgment granted to four doctors: Drs. Kalkwarf, 

Steliga, Milojkovic, and Pennisi. 

We cannot reach the merits of Ford’s argument, however, because we lack a final, 

appealable order. The record indicates that UA was served on 19 February 2015, but there 

is no indication in the record that UA was dismissed from the case. Whether an order is 

final and subject to appeal is a jurisdictional question that our court will raise regardless of 

whether the parties have addressed the issue. Ver Weire v. CNA Fin. Corp., 92 Ark. App. 

353, 213 S.W.3d 646 (2005). An order is not final that adjudicates fewer than all the claims 

or the rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties. Id. Rule 54(b) allows a circuit court, 

when it finds no just reason for delaying an appeal, to direct entry of a final judgment as to 
Cite as 2017 Ark. App. 187 

3 

fewer than all the claims or parties by executing a certification of final judgment. Id. Absent 

this required certification, however, any judgment, order, or other form of decision that 

adjudicates fewer than all the claims or the rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties 

shall not terminate the action. Id. In this case, there is no final order with respect to UA, 

a named and served defendant. Neither is there a Rule 54(b) certificate. Consequently, we 

do not have jurisdiction to hear this appeal and must dismiss the case. 

We also take this opportunity to address Ford’s deficient addendum. Rule 4-2(8) of 

the Rules of the Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals requires the addendum to 

contain all 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.” Ford’s 

addendum contains the orders granting summary judgment to Drs. Milojkovic, Pennisi, 

Kalkwarf, and Steliga, but it does not include (1) the order granting UAMS’s motion to 

dismiss; (2) the order granting Dr. Bhatti’s motion to dismiss; (3) the order granting summary 

judgment to Dr. Bartter and Teka Bartter, APN; and (4) the order dismissing Drs. Rutlen 

and Paydak. In addition, any order disposing of UA should also be in the addendum. 

Without these orders, we cannot determine that all parties have been disposed of and 

therefore confirm our jurisdiction. 

Finally, a motion to dismiss filed by Drs. Rutlen, Paydak, Bartter, Bhatti, and Teka 

Bartter, APN, was filed with this court and submitted with the case. Based on Ford’s brief, 

he has abandoned any appeal of these parties’ dismissal below; nevertheless, they are asking 

this court to dismiss Ford’s appeal as to them “out of an abundance of caution.” We deny 
Cite as 2017 Ark. App. 187 

4 

this motion without prejudice; these defendants are not parties on appeal, so we have 

nothing to dismiss as to them. 

 Dismissed without prejudice. 

 GLADWIN and MURPHY, JJ., agree. 

Frances Morris Finley and Willard Proctor, Jr., for appellant. 

Mitchell, Woods, Selig, Gates & Woodyard, P.L.L.C., by: Jane W. Duke and Graham 

Talley, for appellees Natasa Milojkovic, M.D., and Angela Pennisi, M.D.

Friday, Eldredge & Clark, LLP, by: J. Adam Wells, for appellees Matthew Steliga, 

M.D., and Kyle Kalkwarf, M.D.