Court Opinion

ID: 9611929
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 04:01:29.616228+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:26:59.568447
License: Public Domain

TOM GLAZE, Justice, concurring in part; dissenting in part. iagree ce, Justice Imber’s dissenting opinion wherein she criticizes the majority’s holding which now permits any plaintiff who files a timely motion for extension and obtains an ex parte order to avoid proof of good cause until such time as the defendant demands a showing. This is bad precedent for the reasons discussed by Justice Imber. Nevertheless, I would still reverse the trial court’s dismissal with prejudice against J.W. Carney, M.D., and J.W Carney, M.D., P.A., because the record reflects the appellants complied with Rule 4(i) of the Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure and showed good cause in obtaining an extension of time for service of process. Appellants tried to contact all appellees by registered mail within the required 120-day period under Rule 4(i), and learned only about eight days before the period ended that both Dr. J.W Carney’s and his professional association’s registered agent, attorney Fred Pickens, had died. In my view, appellants were confronted with a legitimate reason for seeking additional time to discover how (and upon whom) they must obtain service. The same cannot be said of appellee-defendant Harris Hospital. In fact, appellants’ registered letters reached Harris Hospital and its agent, and the appellants conceded they knew where Harris Hospital was and how to serve it. Nonetheless, they never attempted service on the hospital or its agent during the 120-day period. While appellants argue their delay in obtaining service was because they had made good-faith efforts at opening settlement dialogue, the appellants’ broaching an interest in settlement, alone, cannot be good cause to extend the service of process time, or the Rule 4(i) extension period could well be manipulated or abused in seeking unnecessary delays. Because I believe the trial court erroneously dismissed the appellants’ complaint against Dr. Carney and his professional association, I would reverse the court. I would affirm its dismissal as to Harris Hospital.