Progressive Eldercare Svcs.-Bryant v. Price (Majority, with Concurring)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Cite as 2016 Ark. App. 528 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISIONS II & III No. CV-16-161 PROGRESSIVE ELDERCARE SERVICESBRYANT, INC. d/b/a SOUTHERN TRACE REHABILITATION AND CARE CENTER APPELLANT V. WILDA PRICE, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF DOVIE PRICE APPELLEE Opinion Delivered November 2, 2016 APPEAL FROM THE SALINE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. 63-CV-13-479-2] HONORABLE GARY ARNOLD, JUDGE AFFIRMED LARRY D. VAUGHT, Judge Appellant Progressive Eldercare Services—Bryant, Inc., d/b/a/ Southern Trace Rehabilitation and Care Center (Progressive) sought summary judgment from the Saline County Circuit Court, claiming charitable immunity as a matter of law. Appellee Wilda Price, as the personal representative of the estate of Dovie Price, resisted the motion, claiming that Progressive not only was not entitled to charitable immunity, but it also was abusing the charitable form to avoid liability. The trial court denied summary judgment. On interlocutory appeal, Progressive argues that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on its defense of charitable immunity. For the reasons stated in Progressive Eldercare Services-Saline, Inc. v. Cauffiel, 2016 Ark. App. ___, handed down this same day, we affirm. Affirmed. GRUBER, HIXSON, and BROWN, JJ., agree. HARRISON and GLOVER, JJ., concur. Cite as 2016 Ark. App. 528 BRANDON J. HARRISON, Judge, concurring. I concur for the same reasons expressed in my concurrence in Progressive Eldercare Services-Saline, Inc. v. Cauffiel, 2016 Ark. App. 523, ___ S.W.3d. ___, handed down today. DAVID M. GLOVER, Judge, concurring. I concur for the same reasons expressed in my concurrence in Progressive Eldercare Services-Saline, Inc. v. Cauffiel, 2016 Ark. App. 523, ___ S.W.3d ___, handed down today. Kutak Rock LLP, by: Mark W. Dossett and Jeff Fletcher, for appellant. Reddick Moss, PLLC, by: Brian D. Reddick, Robert W. Francis, and Matthew D. Swindle, for appellee. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
