Stephens Prod. Co. v. Bennett, CV-15-42

Decision Date28 October 2015
Docket NumberNo. CV-15-42,CV-15-42
Citation2015 Ark. App. 617
PartiesSTEPHENS PRODUCTION COMPANY APPELLANT v. KATHY BENNETT, FRANKLIN COUNTY ASSESSOR; SYLVIA KNOLES, FRANKLIN COUNTY COLLECTOR; and FRANKLIN COUNTY, ARKANSAS APPELLEES
CourtArkansas Court of Appeals

APPEAL FROM THE FRANKLIN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, NORTHERN DISTRICT

[NOS. CV-13-127 and CV-13-1]

HONORABLE DENNIS CHARLES SUTTERFIELD, JUDGE

DISMISSED

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 other 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 company or utility, and even if it was, the assessor is responsible for assessing all producing mineral interests. We dismiss due to a lack of jurisdiction.1

Appellant challenged the Franklin County Assessor's 2011 ad valorem tax assessment against it before the Franklin County Board of Equalization (BOE). The BOE affirmed the assessment, and appellant filed a petition to appeal to county court on October 8, 2012. The petition was signed by James Zeller, appellant's tax accounting manager. The county court entered an order on December 5, 2012, denying appellant's petition. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal to the circuit court on January 2, 2013.

On February 1, 2013, appellant filed a complaint for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief against appellees challenging their 2011 tax assessment, which included taxes against appellant for minerals owned by Franklin County royalty owners. Appellant claimed that the royalty owners owned 12.5% of the minerals, which resulted in appellant being taxed an additional $36,390.06. Appellees filed an answer on March 5, 2013, seeking to have the case dismissed under Rule 12(b). Appellees subsequently filed a motion to dismiss and supporting brief on November 27, 2013, listing three grounds for dismissal: (1) lack of jurisdiction, because the petition to appeal to county court was filed by Zeller, a non-attorney, making that petition a nullity; (2) failure to join necessary parties (Franklin County Equalization Board and Arkansas Assessment Coordination Department); and (3) exclusive jurisdiction by the Arkansas Public Service Commission. Appellant responded on December16, 2013, stating: (1) that it had always been represented by an attorney in the proceedings; (2) that there were no other necessary parties, and even if there were, appellant should be allowed to amend its complaint; and (3) that the Public Service Commission does not assess mineral rights and has nothing to do with this case. Appellant included an affidavit by its attorney, Mark Moll. However, the affidavit was neither signed nor notarized. Appellant also included a brief in support of its response. Appellees replied on December 19, 2013, reiterating that the case should be dismissed.

Appellant also challenged the 2012 assessment against it before the BOE, which affirmed that assessment. On October 9, 2013, appellant filed a petition to appeal. Again, this petition was signed by Zeller. The county court affirmed the BOE in an order entered on November 14, 2013. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal to circuit court on December 4, 2013. On December 20, 2013, appellant filed a complaint for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief against appellees challenging their 2012 tax assessment, under the same grounds it contested the 2011 assessment. According to this complaint, appellant was taxed an additional $33,517.51 based on the royalty owners' share of minerals. Appellant filed motions to consolidate the two cases on January 22, 2014. The court granted the motions on February 26, 2014. The court wrote a letter to the parties on September 16, 2014, stating that it found each of appellees' arguments for dismissal to be well taken. An order granting appellees' motion to dismiss was entered on September 30, 2014. Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal on October 23, 2014. This appeal followed.

We dismiss this appeal for a lack of jurisdiction. Appellant's initial petitions for appeal were null and void...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Desoto Gathering Co. v. Hill
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • November 30, 2017
    ...motion in the alternative to stay the proceedings pending this court's resolution of the petition for review in Stephens Prod. Co. v. Bennett, 2015 Ark. App. 617, 2015 WL 6513813. On February 16, 2016, DeSoto filed a response to the motion to dismiss and in the alternative the motion to sta......
  • Memphis Wrecking Co. v. Dir., Dep't of Workforce Servs.
    • United States
    • Arkansas Court of Appeals
    • January 27, 2021
    ...that seeks to invoke the judicial process is the practice of law. Bank of Fayetteville NA v. Dir., 2016 Ark. App. 96; Stephens Prod. Co. v. Bennett, 2015 Ark. App. 617. Because Williamson was engaged in the unauthorized practice of law when she signed the petition, the petition is null and ......
  • Davis Floor Covering, Inc. v. Director
    • United States
    • Arkansas Court of Appeals
    • November 1, 2017
    ...the process of a court of law constitutes the practice of law. Bank of Fayetteville NA v. Dir., 2016 Ark. App. 96; Stephens Prod. Co. v. Bennett, 2015 Ark. App. 617. Because Davis was practicing law when he signed the petition, the petition is null and void. Id. As a result, we lack jurisdi......
  • Butler Furniture Depot, Inc. v. Director
    • United States
    • Arkansas Court of Appeals
    • April 25, 2018
    ...the process of a court of law constitutes the practice of law. Davis Floor Covering, Inc. v. Dir., 2017 Ark. App. 581; Stephens Prod. Co. v. Bennett, 2015 Ark. App. 617. Because Butler was practicing law when he signed the petition, the petition is null and void. Id. As a result, we lack ju......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT