Jacobs v. Collison, 2015 Ark. App. 420

Ruth Jacobs and Derek Collison lived together in a long-term, nonmarital personal and professional relationship; relationship began in 2006 and ended in 2013.
Jacobs filed suit (Jan. 22, 2014) seeking a declaratory judgment that a partnership existed, dissolution of that partnership, imposition of a constructive trust on half of the parties’ assets, and a variety of equitable and tort remedies; she later amended her complaint.
Collison did not answer the complaint but filed a counterclaim for unlawful detainer seeking Jacobs’s eviction; he also moved to dismiss Jacobs’s amended complaint under Ark. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).
A writ of possession was issued by the circuit clerk after Jacobs failed to respond to a notice of intent to issue the writ; the circuit court granted Collison’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion and dismissed Jacobs’s amended complaint with prejudice.
The Court of Appeals raised finality sua sponte and held the dismissal was not a final, appealable order because Collison’s counterclaim for unlawful detainer remained unresolved and there was no Rule 54(b) certification.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether dismissal of Jacobs’s amended complaint is a final, appealable order when a counterclaim remains pending	Jacobs pursued appeal of dismissal of her complaint and sought appellate review	Collison treated counterclaim (unlawful detainer) separately; court below dismissed Jacobs’s complaint	Not final or appealable because the counterclaim was not disposed of and no Rule 54(b) certificate was entered; appeal dismissed
Whether the clerk-issued writ of possession constituted final adjudication of the counterclaim	Jacobs argued writ and practical vacancy might render counterclaim effectively resolved	Collison relied on clerk’s writ to regain possession	Writ issued under Ark. Code § 18-60-307(b) is not a final adjudication of rights; circuit court must enter an order disposing of the counterclaim or a Rule 54(b) certificate to make judgment appealable

Moses v. Hanna’s Candle Co., 353 Ark. 101 (jurisdictional finality is a question the court will raise sua sponte)
Dodge v. Lee, 350 Ark. 480 (Rule 54(b) requires disposal of all claims/parties for finality)
City of Corning v. Cochran, 350 Ark. 12 (same rule on final judgment and multiple claims)
Office of Child Support Enforcement v. Willis, 341 Ark. 378 (orders that do not adjudicate all claims are not final)
Bevans v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co., 373 Ark. 105 (order disposing of some claims but not counterclaims is not appealable)
Williamson v. Misemer, 316 Ark. 192 (final orders must cover all parties and claims)