From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Burton v. Templeman

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION IV
Feb 18, 2015
2015 Ark. App. 101 (Ark. Ct. App. 2015)

Opinion

No. CV-14-425

02-18-2015

TINA ALMASY BURTON APPELLANT v. DAVID TEMPLEMAN APPELLEE

Dick Jarboe, for appellant. No response.


APPEAL FROM THE RANDOLPH COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
[NO. DR-03-154]
HONORABLE KEVIN KING, JUDGE APPEAL DISMISSED BRANDON J. HARRISON, Judge

The parties, who were married eleven years and had four children together, divorced in 2003. David Templeman received custody of the children, and Tina Burton received standard visitation. In June 2012, the circuit court found that a material change of circumstances had occurred when Templeman moved to Georgia with the children. As a result, the court modified Tina Burton's visitation rights; it also ordered that the "children shall not be exposed to Anthony Burton." Burton was Tina's boyfriend at the time and is a convicted felon. Tina later married Anthony Burton.

In September 2012, Tina moved again to modify visitation. More than one year later, in November 2013, David filed a motion for citation and other relief, alleging that Tina had exposed the children to Anthony Burton in violation of the court's June 2012 order. In due course, the court convened a hearing on Tina's request to modify visitation and David's motion for citation. The court entered an order in February 2014, which states in part:

That [David's] motion for directed verdict is granted as [Tina] failed to prove the existence of a material change in circumstances, or an agreement between the parties, which would allow modification of the previous order herein. Therefore [Tina's] complaint is denied.




. . . .



The Court reserves a ruling on [David's] Motion for Citation and Other Relief.
Tina timely appealed that order to this court, but we cannot yet decide this appeal's merits.

Under Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) (2013), an order is not final when it "adjudicates fewer than all the claims or the rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties." The circuit court decided the visitation issue, but it specifically reserved a ruling on the contempt issue. And we have no Rule 54(b) certificate that might create the finality necessary to vest this court with jurisdiction to address the visitation issue that was decided. See Hambay v. Williams, 335 Ark. 352, 980 S.W.2d 263 (1998). Because the February 26 order that Tina has appealed is not a final, appealable order we must dismiss this appeal without prejudice.

Appeal dismissed.

WHITEAKER and VAUGHT, JJ., agree.

Dick Jarboe, for appellant.

No response.


Summaries of

Burton v. Templeman

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION IV
Feb 18, 2015
2015 Ark. App. 101 (Ark. Ct. App. 2015)
Case details for

Burton v. Templeman

Case Details

Full title:TINA ALMASY BURTON APPELLANT v. DAVID TEMPLEMAN APPELLEE

Court:ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION IV

Date published: Feb 18, 2015

Citations

2015 Ark. App. 101 (Ark. Ct. App. 2015)

Citing Cases

John v. Bolinder

However, we do not agree, and our conclusion is supported by our prior holdings. SeeBurton v. Templeman ,…

Anderson-Tully Co. v. Vaden

We hold that the orders on appeal lack finality. We have held that when contempt issues remain pending before…