Earls v. Harvest Credit Mgmt. VI-B LLC (Majority, with Concurring and Dissenting)
Annotate this CaseAppellants received a credit card, and Appellee was the assignee of the credit-card account. When the account went unpaid, Appellee filed a complaint seeking a judgment against Appellants. Appellants were served with process. The summons correctly stated the time period in which an in-state defendant and an out-of-state defendant had to file an answer but incorrectly stated the time period in which an incarcerated defendant had to file an answer. Appellants were not incarcerated. When Appellants did not answer the complaint, the circuit court entered a default judgment in favor of Appellee. Appellants filed a motion to set aside the default judgment, arguing that the summons was defective on its face and did not strictly comply with Ark. R. Civ. P. 4 because of the incorrect response time related to incarcerated defendants. In response, Appellee asserted that because Appellants’ response time was correctly listed on the summons, the summons complied with Rule 4. The circuit court denied Appellants’ motion. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that because Appellee’s summons contained an incorrect response time, it failed to strictly comply with Rule 4(b), and therefore, service upon Appellants was improper.
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.