Opinion

Goodall v. Williams

  • 271 Ark. 354
  • 609 S.W.2d 25
  • 1980 Ark. LEXIS 1705
Court
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Filed
Dec 8, 1980
Status
Published
Author
Purtle
On the bench
Mays, Purtle, Stroud
Cited by
11 cases
Authority
More cited than 7.7%

The opinion

John I. Purtle, Justice, concurring. I concur in the results reached by the majority; however, I would hold that a trial de novo as mentioned in Ark. Stat. Ann. § 48-311 (E) (Repl. 1977) means that the proceedings before the Commission and its findings and orders would be filed with the circuit court and considered along with any other evidence which was presented.

Apparently, there are two thoughts as to the meaning of a trial de novo. The case of Byrd v. Jones, 263 Ark. 406 , 565 S.W. 2d 531 (1978), held that there were two methods of perfecting an appeal from the ABC decisions. One of those is § 48-311 (E) and the other is the Administrative Procedure Act of 1967, codified as Ark. Stat. Ann. § 5-713 (Repl. 1976). Although both these methods are available in appealing an ABC order, both of them require the case to be tried de novo in the circuit court.

I find nothing in Byrd v. Jones, supra, or in Jones v. Reed, 267 Ark. 237 , 590 S.W. 2d 6 (1979), to prohibit the circuit court from considering the record of the hearing before the ABC Commission. Therefore, I believe that a trial de novo means the same regardless of which method is used to perfect the appeal. The record before the Commission should be presented to the trial court for consideration along with any other evidence the trial court deems proper for a correct resolution of the dispute.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.