Opinion ID: 6110794
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Insufficient Process

Text: Appellees' motion to dismiss argued that Davis failed to perfect service. If service of a valid summons and a copy of the complaint is not made within 120 days after filing the complaint, the action shall be dismissed without prejudice. Ark. R. Civ. P. 4(i). The circuit court dismissed the action after the 120 days expired. On appeal, Davis does not argue that he obtained valid service, but rather that any failure to obtain service is not his fault. The record does not reflect any attempt by Davis to serve either DePriest or Rutledge within the 120 days provided by Rule 4. Appellees allege Davis's attempt to  serve Kelley was insufficient because he failed to comply with Rule 4(b) and (d). Specifically, Appellees contend that the plaintiff's name and address portion of the summons was noncompliant with Ark. R. Civ. P. 4(b) insofar as it was completely blank. Appellees further argue that the attempted service on Kelley violated Ark. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(8)(A)(i) because service was sent by regular U.S. Postal Service mail and failed to restrict delivery to the person being served. Finally, although Davis's petition references twenty-one exhibits, the package he mailed Kelley only included four. In neglecting to include the remaining seventeen exhibits, Appellees argue that failure to provide a complete copy of the petition does not comport with the requirements of Rule 4(d). Ark. R. Civ. P. 4(d) (A copy of the summons and complaint shall be served together.) (emphasis added). Davis learned of these deficiencies almost sixty days before the service deadline; however, he did not reattempt service. As a result, the 120 days for service expired and the circuit court entered the dismissal order. Again, he does not deny his failure to serve Appellees. Instead, he blames the circuit clerk for the error. This argument is unavailing and not preserved on appeal. Indeed, Davis filed his response to the motion to dismiss well after time had run and after the circuit court issued its ruling. See, e.g. , Taylor v. Taylor , 369 Ark. 31 , 38, 250 S.W.3d 232 , 238 (2007) (maintaining that this court will not consider arguments that are not raised before the circuit court and ruled upon). Davis failed to perfect service on the Appellees within the time provided by Rule 4. Accordingly, we find that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in granting Appellees' motion to dismiss. However, dismissal should have been without prejudice. Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 4(i)(1) plainly states that [i]f service of the summons and a copy of the complaint is not made upon a defendant within 120 days after the filing of the complaint ... the action shall be dismissed as to that defendant without prejudice.  Ark. R. Civ. P. 4(i)(1) (emphasis added). In similar situations, our practice has been to affirm the result but modify dismissal to be without prejudice. See, e.g. , Malone v. Trans-States Lines, Inc. , 325 Ark. 383 , 387, 926 S.W.2d 659 , 662 (1996) ; Hubbard v. Shores Grp., Inc. , 313 Ark. 498 , 504, 855 S.W.2d 924 , 928 (1993) ; Spires v. Members of Election Comm'n of Union Cty. , 302 Ark. 407 , 410, 790 S.W.2d 167 , 169 (1990). Therefore, we modify the order dismissing the case to without prejudice.