Opinion ID: 6317071
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: KBX’s Counterclaims

Text: KBX argues that the circuit court erred in granting the farmers’ motion for summary judgment on its counterclaims and in ruling that “the litigation privilege applied to all of KBX’s tort causes of action against the [farmers].” KBX contends that the “litigation privilege” applies only to claims of defamation. During the litigation, KBX became aware of public, negative comments, such as “KBX is a bunch of crooks[,]” and KBX “stole their rice.” In September 2017, KBX filed a counterclaim and third-party complaint asserting claims against the farmers for abuse of process, interference with contractual relationship or business expectancy, defamation, civil action by crime victim, and conspiracy. The farmers moved for summary judgment, asserting litigation privilege and lack of evidence. The circuit court granted the motion for summary judgment. We have held that we will not consider arguments without convincing argument or citations to authority. Seth v. St. Edward Mercy Med. Ctr., 375 Ark. 413, 420, 291 S.W.3d 179, 185 (2009). Here, KBX’s four-sentence argument in its brief is not well developed, and notably, KBX does not mention its counterclaims in its request for relief in the brief. Thus, we hold that KBX does not present convincing argument to this court, and accordingly, we affirm the circuit court’s dismissal of its counterclaims.