Cite as 2017 Ark. App. 500
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION I
No.CV-16-1122
NICK MURPHY OPINION DELIVERED: OCTOBER 4, 2017
APPELLANT
APPEAL FROM THE SHARP
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
V. [NO. 68CV-10-240]
HONORABLE HAROLD S. ERWIN,
FNBC BANK F/K/A FIRST NATIONAL JUDGE
BANKING COMPANY
APPELLEE APPEAL DISMISSED
ROBERT J. GLADWIN, Judge
The Sharp County Circuit Court granted summary judgment to appellee FNBC
Bank f/k/a First National Banking Company (“FNBC”), dismissing appellant Nick
Murphy’s claims against FNBC with prejudice. Murphy argues on appeal that the circuit
court erred in granting summary judgment because genuine issues of material fact existed.
However, we do not reach Murphy’s claims because this court lacks jurisdiction. We
recognize that we should have granted FNBC’s motion to dismiss, which was filed with this
court on February 8, 2017. However, the case is fully before us, and upon closer review of
the motion and record, we are compelled to admit our mistake and dismiss the appeal
because compliance with Rule 54(b) is a jurisdictional matter. Ark. R. Civ. P. 54(b) (2016);
Stratton v. Ark. State Hwy. Comm’n, 323 Ark. 740, 917 S.W.2d 538 (1996). Because the
order appealed from is not a final judgment and the Rule 54(b) certificate does not include
Cite as 2017 Ark. App. 500
the requisite specific factual findings that warrant “no just reason for delay,” we dismiss the
appeal.
Murphy filed a complaint against Wesley and Kathleen Austin on August 31, 2010,
alleging that they had breached a partnership agreement with him by failing to account for
the profits of their rental-property business. The complaint states, “Funds [from the rental-
property business] were placed in a Partnership Account at FNB[.]” On March 10, 2014,
Murphy filed an amended complaint for breach of contract, adding FNBC as a defendant.
FNBC filed a motion to dismiss on May 8, 2014, claiming that Murphy had failed to state
facts on which relief could be granted. See Ark. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) (2014). After a hearing,
the circuit court denied the motion to dismiss by order filed March 9, 2015.
On May 9, 2015, FNBC filed a motion for summary judgment with an attached
affidavit of Rebekah Guiltner. The circuit court granted summary judgment by order filed
August 25, 2016, and dismissed FNBC with prejudice. On September 8, 2016, Murphy
filed a notice of appeal, and on September 12, 2016, Murphy filed a motion for new trial
and to vacate the summary-judgment order. On October 6, 2016, an amended order
granting summary judgment and dismissing FNBC with prejudice was filed with an attached
Rule 54(b) certificate that purports to allow an appeal of the circuit court’s decision, even
though Murphy’s claims against the Austins have not been resolved. Rule 54(b) provides
in part:
When more than one claim for relief is presented in an action, whether as a claim,
counterclaim, cross-claim, or third party claim, or when multiple parties are
involved, the court may direct the entry of a final judgment as to one or more but
fewer than all of the claims or parties only upon an express determination, supported
by specific factual findings, that there is no just reason for delay and upon an express
direction for the entry of judgment. (Emphasis added.)
2
Cite as 2017 Ark. App. 500
The Rule 54(b) certificate at issue states that the claims between Murphy and FNBC
have been concluded by the summary-judgment order. However, the certificate gives no
specific factual finding to support that “there is no just reason for delay” of the appeal. The
certificate does not explain why the order dismissing FNBC should be appealed before the
circuit court concludes Murphy’s claims against the Austins. Accordingly, we dismiss for
lack of jurisdiction.
Dismissed.
HARRISON and KLAPPENBACH, JJ., agree.
Ronald S. Burnett, Jr., and Joel G. Hargis, for appellant.
Quattlebaum, Grooms & Tull PLLC, by: E.B. Chiles IV, for appellee.
3