Court Opinion

ID: 9767531
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 05:20:51.678847+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:30:31.515454
License: Public Domain

Tom Glaze, Justice, concurring. The majority opinion correctly concludes that Mr. Cherepski’s complaint is in essence an action for alienation of affection, and such an action was abolished by Act 46 of 1989, now compiled as Ark. Code Ann. §16-118-106 (Supp. 1993). In my view, this case ends when this court makes these holdings. Nonetheless, the majority opinion further discusses issues concerning the statute of limitations, claims of negligence and tort of outrage, breach of fiduciary duty, and clergy malpractice. While I believe the majority opinion’s discussions of these issues are unnecessary, I do join in the majority court’s ultimate decision upholding the trial court’s order of dismissal of Cherepski’s complaint.