Green v. Stueve, 2017 Ark. App. 167

In 2013 Anita Fay sued David Stueve and John and Gail Green for partition of a 120‑acre tract she alleged she owned with Stueve as joint tenants with right of survivorship. Fay sought one‑half of mineral interests, one‑half of sale proceeds, injunctive relief against timber/landscaping, and damages for property harm.
Stueve had conveyed his interest to John Green via two deeds, but stayed in possession; Stueve counterclaimed seeking to set aside those deeds for fraud, undue influence, and failure of consideration and sought damages.
John Green cross‑claimed that he had invested labor and funds in exchange for the deeds and sought reimbursement if required to surrender title; the trial court awarded Green $10,125 for trackhoe work.
The trial court entered an order setting aside Stueve’s deeds to Green (finding undue influence and failure of consideration) but expressly reserved Fay’s partition, injunction, and damages claims for later determination.
The Greens appealed; this court previously dismissed for lack of a final order. After that dismissal, Fay nonsuited her partition claim; Stueve conveyed his interest to a third party; but Fay’s damages claims and the possibility of refiling remained unresolved.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court’s order setting aside the deeds is a final, appealable judgment	Greens: order is final as to ownership and should be appealable	Stueve: order is not final because other claims remain pending	Not final; appeal dismissed for lack of final judgment
Whether unresolved damage claims (by Stueve or Fay) prevent finality	Greens: damages either resolved or separable from deed issue	Stueve: unresolved damage claims prevent finality	Unresolved damages preclude finality
Whether Fay’s voluntary nonsuit of partition renders the case final	Greens: nonsuit effectively ends partition claims so appeal can proceed	Stueve: nonsuit is without prejudice and she may refile, so finality not assured	Nonsuit does not establish finality because refiling remains possible (citing Crockett)
Whether procedural defects in the appellate addendum/notice affect appeal	Greens: procedural defects curable or minor	Stueve: defects warrant note and correction on refiling	Court noted addendum/notice deficiencies and advised compliance if appeal refiled

Crockett v. C.A.G. Invs., Inc., 361 S.W.3d 262 (Ark. 2010) (a voluntary nonsuit is without prejudice and may permit refiling, affecting whether an order is final and appealable)

Dismissed without prejudice.