698 S.W.3d 367
Ark. Ct. App.2024Background:
- Greennecks Lawn Services LLC and Joseph Swayze (president/sole member) contracted with Stephen Lewis for landscaping services; Lewis claimed the work was incomplete and unsatisfactory.
- Lewis sent a demand letter in August 2022 seeking withdrawal of a lien notice and damages; when unsatisfied, he sued Swayze and the LLC in October 2022.
- Swayze and the LLC were both served; a pro se Motion for Extension of Time (MET) to answer was filed near the response deadline, citing need to find counsel.
- The trial court denied the MET (believing it untimely and only on behalf of the LLC), entered a default judgment against both, denied a later motion to set aside, and awarded damages, attorney's fees, and costs to Lewis.
- Swayze and the LLC appealed, raising errors related to timeliness, standards under Civil Procedure rules, and support for the damages/fees award.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of MET filing | MET was filed late; default appropriate | MET was timely (due to court holiday); extension justified | MET was timely, but not outcome-determinative |
| Standard for granting MET under Rule 6(b)(1) | No good cause shown | Seeking counsel is good cause; Rule 6(b)(1) to be construed liberally | Arguments not preserved or developed; court's denial affirmed |
| Entry of default judgment and Swayze's defense | Swayze failed to answer/otherwise defend | Swayze defended by filing MET; default against him improper | Default affirmed; MET deemed on LLC's behalf only |
| Sufficiency of damages and attorney's fees support | Requests supported by affidavit; no objection raised | Awards unsupported; challenge both damages and fees | Not preserved for appeal; awards affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- DeSoto Gathering Co. LLC v. Hill, 2017 Ark. 326 (corporations must be represented by attorneys; pro se filings by non-attorneys are nullities)
- Lucas v. Jones, 2012 Ark. 365 (pro se litigants held to same standards as attorneys; rules must be followed)
- McFadden-Gregory v. Johnson, 2023 Ark. App. 100 (arguments not made or ruled on below are not preserved for appellate review)
- Unimeks, LLC v. Purolite, 2012 Ark. 20 (findings of fact not reversed unless clearly erroneous)
- Dodge v. Lee, 352 Ark. 235 (court distinguishes between errors in case caption and substance of filings)