{
  "id": 1902471,
  "name": "W. J. JACKSON and Alta Jackson, His Wife v. Gothie YOWELL",
  "name_abbreviation": "Jackson v. Yowell",
  "decision_date": "1991-11-11",
  "docket_number": "91-171",
  "first_page": "222",
  "last_page": "223",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "307 Ark. 222"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "818 S.W.2d 950"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "277 Ark. 25",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1750204
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1982,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/277/0025-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 181,
    "char_count": 1984,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.901,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.515941197622767e-07,
      "percentile": 0.8110185188402876
    },
    "sha256": "67ee13e21e894f376412d7e9cf4ff47649e279192643274bccaaa2b20bf51eac",
    "simhash": "1:59d25332dc6a3dba",
    "word_count": 324
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:45:32.876763+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "W. J. JACKSON and Alta Jackson, His Wife v. Gothie YOWELL"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Tom Glaze, Justice.\nOn May 22, 1986, appellee brought suit against appellants seeking, among other things, to set aside certain deeds and to quiet title in the mineral estate described in the deeds. After appellants filed their answer, little, and then no, activity occurred in the lawsuit, so the trial court dismissed the case for want of prosecution on January 2,1990, pursuant to the court\u2019s standing order dated January 2, 1987. The trial court, however, ordered appellee\u2019s case reinstated on January 25,1990. The appellants then moved to vacate the restatement order pursuant to ARCP 41(b), claiming the dismissal should have been with prejudice because the dismissal had been appellee\u2019s second. The trial court denied appellants\u2019 motion and appellants bring this appeal.\nWe do not reach appellants\u2019 Rule 41(b) issue because the trial court\u2019s order denying appellants\u2019 motion to vacate the reinstatement of appellant\u2019s case is not a final judgment or order from which an appeal may be taken. Rule 2(a)(1) of the Arkansas Rules of Appellate Procedure. For a judgment to be final, it must dismiss the parties from the court, discharge them from the action, or conclude their rights to the subject matter in controversy. Roberts Enterprises, Inc. v. Arkansas Highway Comm\u2019n, 277 Ark. 25, 638 S.W.2d 675 (1982); see also 4 C.J.S. Appeal & Error \u00a7 121(c) (1957) (which provides, generally, an appeal will not lie from an order setting aside an order of dismissal.) Here, the trial court\u2019s order makes no such disposition of the parties\u2019 case, and in fact, retained jurisdiction over the parties and issues in controversy for future adjudication.\nBecause the trial court\u2019s order is not a final one from which an appeal may be taken, we dismiss appellants\u2019 appeal.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Tom Glaze, Justice."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Grumpier, O\u2019Connor & Wynne, for appellants.",
      "Michael R. Landers, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "W. J. JACKSON and Alta Jackson, His Wife v. Gothie YOWELL\n91-171\n818 S.W.2d 950\nSupreme Court of Arkansas\nOpinion delivered November 11, 1991\nGrumpier, O\u2019Connor & Wynne, for appellants.\nMichael R. Landers, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0222-01",
  "first_page_order": 248,
  "last_page_order": 249
}