Smith v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.

• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: HICKMAN
• Citation: Smith v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 549 S.W.2d 798, 261 Ark. 541 (Ark. 1977)
• Decision Date: 02 May 1977
• Docket Number: No. 2,No. 76-351,76-351,2
• Parties: Jimmy SMITH, Administrator of the Estate of James Albert Smith, Deceased, Appellant, v. The GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, Appellee

Page 798

549 S.W.2d 798

261 Ark. 541

Jimmy SMITH, Administrator of the Estate of James Albert Smith, Deceased, Appellant, v. The GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 76-351.

Supreme Court of Arkansas, Division No. 2.

May 2, 1977.

Rehearing Denied May 31, 1977.

Murphy & Carlisle, Fayetteville, for appellant.

Erwin L. Davis, Fayetteville, for appellee.

HICKMAN, Justice.

This case is an appeal from a summary judgment granted to Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company and its local store against Jimmy Smith, Administrator for the estate of James Albert Smith. The Washington County Circuit Court granted the judgment because the attorney for appellant, Jimmy Smith, Administrator, failed to file a response to the requests for admission of facts within the ten days required by Arkansas law.

Only two issues are raised on appeal. The appellant argues the trial court abused its discretion in granting the judgment because the responses were not timely filed and there remained material facts in dispute.

The facts necessary to make a decision are essentially undisputed. Goodyear filed suit against Smith, Administrator, on a promissory note alleged to have been signed by the deceased, James Albert Smith. Smith filed a motion to quash the summons and service. It was overruled. Smith filed a demurrer and an answer generally denying the allegations of the complaint. Goodyear filed forty-six requests for admission of facts on November 12, 1975, attaching to the requests copies of the promissory note, a deed and various certificates of title to vehicles. It is not disputed that the attorney for appellant called the attorney for appellee and stated he would get the answers filed on the 25th of November. They were not filed until November 26th, fourteen days after the requests were filed. Most of the answers to the requests were either "denied" or "unknown neither denied nor admitted".

The Arkansas law provides that answers to requests for admission of facts will be filed within ten days from service. Ark.Stats.Ann. § 28-358 (Repl.1962). The appellant admits that the answers were not filed within the time period required by the statute, nor were they filed on the date appellant agreed to file them. Furthermore, the appellant did not request from the court additional time to answer. Perhaps more important, the responses to the requests were almost all unresponsive. We have held that where a fact cannot be admitted, the reasons must be set forth in detail. See ...