Kenneth W. Tilley, Individually and as Trustee of the Kenneth Tilley Family Trust v. Malvern National Bank and Stephen Moore, 590 S.W.3d 137

Kenneth Tilley signed a loan agreement containing a pre-dispute jury-waiver clause; the circuit court struck his jury demand and conducted a bench trial, entering judgment against him.
Arkansas Supreme Court in Tilley v. Malvern National Bank (Tilley I) held pre-dispute contractual jury waivers unenforceable under Ark. Const. art. 2, § 7, and remanded for a jury trial.
After the supreme-court mandate issued, the General Assembly enacted Act 13 (2018), which expressly validated contractual jury waivers in loan contracts and included retroactivity and emergency provisions.
On remand, the circuit court sua sponte considered Act 13, applied it retroactively, enforced the loan’s jury-waiver clause, and reinstated the bench judgment.
Tilley appealed; the Arkansas Supreme Court held that the mandate rule and law-of-the-case doctrine barred the circuit court from entertaining Act 13 on remand, reversed, and remanded for a jury trial.
The court declined to reach the constitutionality or enforceability of Act 13’s waiver provision; separate opinions concurred or dissented on the mandate-rule exception and separation-of-powers concerns.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Tilley)	Defendant's Argument (MNB)	Held
Whether Act 13 applies to this remanded case	Act 13 cannot be applied on remand because the supreme-court mandate and law-of-the-case require a jury trial	Act 13 is a retroactive legislative change in controlling law that the trial court may apply on remand	Court: Trial court erred; mandate and law-of-the-case barred consideration of Act 13; reversed and remanded for jury trial
Whether contractual pre-dispute jury waiver is valid/enforceable under Act 13	The waiver remains invalid under the Constitution per Tilley I	Act 13 validates such waivers for loan contracts and should control	Court: Did not decide merits (unnecessary after reversal on Issue 1)

Tilley v. Malvern Nat’l Bank, 532 S.W.3d 570 (Ark. 2017) (holding pre-dispute contractual jury waivers unenforceable and remanding for jury trial)
Dye v. Diamante, 509 S.W.3d 643 (Ark. 2017) (mandate rule explained)
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Regions Bank Tr. Dep’t, 156 S.W.3d 249 (Ark. 2004) (trial courts must follow appellate mandate)
Ingle v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 449 S.W.3d 283 (Ark. 2014) (lower court bound by appellate judgment and mandate)
Cadillac Cowboy, Inc. v. Jackson, 69 S.W.3d 383 (Ark. 2002) (law-of-the-case doctrine prevents relitigation of decided issues)
Green v. George’s Farm, Inc., 378 S.W.3d 715 (Ark. 2011) (law-of-the-case promotes finality and consistency)
Mode v. Barnett, 361 S.W.2d 525 (Ark. 1962) (discussion of Legislature’s role in prescribing waiver mechanisms)