2022 Ark. App. 99
Ark. Ct. App.2022Background:
- Appellant Kerry Hollis (pro se) is the father of two children; their maternal grandmother, Valerie Hinton, was awarded grandparent visitation in August 2015 over Hollis’s objections.
- A contempt hearing on December 7, 2016 produced a December 19, 2016 order revising visitation; Hollis filed a petition to terminate Hinton’s visitation on December 20, 2016.
- After a hearing on April 24, 2019, the circuit court denied Hollis’s petition to terminate visitation on June 8, 2020; Hollis filed a motion for reconsideration on June 10, 2020.
- Because the circuit court did not rule within 30 days, Hollis’s motion was deemed denied by operation of law on July 10, 2020, making his deadline to file a timely notice of appeal August 9, 2020; Hollis did not file his notice of appeal until January 19, 2021.
- The circuit court later set a hearing and entered a December 28, 2020 order denying reconsideration; the Court of Appeals held the circuit court lacked jurisdiction to act on the reconsideration as to matters previously decided because no new changed circumstances were alleged.
Issues:
| Issue | Hollis (plaintiff) | Hinton (defendant) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of appeal from posttrial motion | Notice of appeal (Jan 19, 2021) is sufficient to review prior orders | Appeal is untimely; motion deemed denied July 10, 2020, so appeal deadline was Aug 9, 2020 | Appeal dismissed as untimely; Hollis missed the appeal window |
| Circuit court jurisdiction to hear/decide the reconsideration motion | Court could hear reconsideration and revisit visitation orders | Court lacked jurisdiction to act on a motion deemed denied as to matters already decided unless new circumstances were alleged | Circuit court acted without jurisdiction on previously decided matters; it may act only upon new/changed circumstances |
| Whether Hollis alleged new/changed circumstances or raised merits (best interest/statutory-reasoning claims) | Asserts the visitation order lacked required statutory explanation and is not in children’s best interest | Hollis rehashed prior disputes and did not plead any new or changed circumstances; merits not reached | Hollis did not allege new/changed circumstances; appellate review of merits was not timely and was not reached |
Key Cases Cited
- Slaton v. Slaton, 330 Ark. 287 (1997) (circuit court lacks jurisdiction to rule on a posttrial motion after it is deemed denied by operation of law)
- Wilson v. Wilson, 487 S.W.3d 420 (Ark. App. 2016) (circuit court retains authority to modify visitation when presented with a change in circumstances)
- Bowen v. Bowen, 421 S.W.3d 339 (Ark. App. 2012) (grandparent-visitation statute is in derogation of the common law and must be strictly construed)