holding that a circuit court’s order stating that “[t]here was no genuine issue as to any material fact” was sufficient to preserve appellant’s issue on appeal when the issue had been presented to the circuit court
How later courts described this case
- holding that a circuit court’s order stating that “[t]here was no genuine issue as to any material fact” was sufficient to preserve appellant’s issue on appeal when the issue had been presented to the circuit court
- rejeeting plaintiffs argument that because he was involved with the limited liability company which hired the lawyer, that the plaintiff could “stand in the shoes of the LLC” and sue the lawyer
- equitable claim of estoppel barred by Ark. Code Ann. § 16-22-310
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Annabelle Clinton Imber, Justice, concurring. I agree with the majority that the circuit court erred in granting summary judgment; however, I conclude that Jackson failed to preserve his estoppel argument for appeal. The majority concludes that by granting summary judgment in favor of appellees, the trial court effectively ruled on Jackson’s estoppel argument. It is well settled that to preserve an argument for appeal, the appellant must obtain a ruling below. Arkansas State Racing Comm’n v. Ward, Inc., 346 Ark. 371 , 57 S.W.3d 198 (2001). The circuit court did not rule on Jackson’s estoppel argument. Thus, the argument has not been preserved for appellate review.