Stephens Prod. Co. v. Bennett (Majority)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Cite as 2015 Ark. App. 416 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION IV No. CV-15-42 Opinion Delivered STEPHENS PRODUCTION COMPANY APPELLANT June 17, 2015 APPEAL FROM THE FRANKLIN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, NORTHERN DISTRICT [NOS. CV-13-127 and CV-13-1] V. KATHY BENNETT, FRANKLIN COUNTY ASSESSOR; SYLVIA KNOLES, FRANKLIN COUNTY COLLECTOR; and FRANKLIN COUNTY, ARKANSAS APPELLEES HONORABLE DENNIS CHARLES SUTTERFIELD, JUDGE SUPPLEMENTAL ADDENDUM ORDERED WAYMOND M. BROWN, Judge Appellant Stephens Production Company appeals the Franklin County Circuit Court’s order granting appellees’ motion to dismiss. Appellant argues on appeal that the court’s dismissal was an abuse of discretion. More specifically, appellant argues that (1) the trial court’s dismissal on the basis of lack of jurisdiction was in error because appellant was represented in county court by a licensed attorney; (2) the court’s dismissal on the basis of failure to name necessary parties was an abuse of discretion because there were no necessary parties, and even if there were, appellant should have been given the opportunity to make them parties; and (3) the court’s dismissal on the basis of exclusive Arkansas Public Service Commission jurisdiction was an abuse of discretion because appellant is not a pipeline Cite as 2015 Ark. App. 416 company or utility, and even if it was, the assessor is responsible for assessing all producing mineral interests. We do not reach the merits of appellant’s arguments due to deficiencies in the addendum. Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2(a)(8)1 requires that the addendum to the appellant’s brief contain copies of non-transcript documents in the record on appeal that are essential for the appellate court to confirm its jurisdiction, understand the case, and decide the issues on appeal. Here, appellant has failed to include the notices of appeal to county court as well as the motions to consolidate the cases in the addendum. We direct appellant to file a supplemental addendum within seven calendar days of this opinion.2 We encourage counsel to review our rules to ensure that no other deficiencies are present. Supplemental addendum ordered. ABRAMSON and GLOVER, JJ., agree. Jones, Jackson & Moll, PLC, by: Mark Moll, for appellant. James C. Mainard, Franklin County Civil Attorney, for appellees. 1 (2014). 2 Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2(b)(4). -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.
