Ward v. Hutchinson, 555 S.W.3d 866

Bruce Earl Ward, a death-row inmate, submitted an IFP petition and a § 1983 complaint to the Pulaski County Circuit Clerk on October 12, 2015; the clerk did not assign a civil case number or file the complaint because no filing fee was paid and the IFP was denied.
Ward had previously filed an identical federal suit but voluntarily nonsuited that federal case before attempting to file in state court.
The circuit court denied Ward's IFP and a motion for reconsideration; the documents received only an administrative/miscellaneous number rather than a civil docket number.
Appellees filed two motions to dismiss under the administrative number, arguing failure to serve and failure to prosecute; no judge acted on the first motion.
On May 31, 2017, the circuit court entered an order dismissing the complaint with prejudice for failure to prosecute and calling the dismissal an adjudication on the merits; the order likewise bore only the administrative number.
Ward moved for reconsideration arguing no complaint was ever filed (no fee paid nor indigency granted), so the court lacked jurisdiction; the court denied reconsideration and Ward appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the circuit court had jurisdiction to dismiss the complaint	Ward: Complaint was never filed because IFP denied and no fee paid, so no action commenced	Appellees: Suit was filed (administrative number) and dismissal proper for failure to prosecute/serve; prior federal dismissal makes it adjudication on merits	Held: Complaint was never filed; court lacked jurisdiction; dismissal vacated
Whether dismissal operated as an adjudication on the merits	Ward: No adjudication because no case was filed to be adjudicated	Appellees: Dismissal under Rule 41(b) operates as adjudication because of prior federal nonsuit	Held: Not reached as dismissal was void for lack of jurisdiction because action never filed
Whether clerk’s use of administrative number affected appealability	Ward: Lack of civil case number shows complaints were not filed of record	Appellees: Administrative processing still allowed motions to dismiss	Held: Administrative number showed filings were not on the docket; supports that no case was filed
Effect of Pulaski clerk practice predating Penn v. Gallagher	Ward: Practice prevented proper filing and deprived court of jurisdiction	Appellees: Past practice was permissible	Held: Court noted Penn ended practice of not filing IFP petitions and denials; Ward’s IFP disposition predated Penn

W. Memphis Sch. Dist. v. Circuit Court of Crittenden Cty., 316 Ark. 290, 871 S.W.2d 368 (Ark. 1994) (jurisdiction is court’s power to act)
Rose v. Harbor E., Inc., 2013 Ark. 496, 430 S.W.3d 773 (Ark. 2013) (orders entered without jurisdiction are void)
McClellan v. Young, 232 Ark. 679, 339 S.W.2d 624 (Ark. 1960) (payment or waiver of filing fee required before civil action is filed)
Penn v. Gallagher, 2015 Ark. 472 (Ark. 2015) (ended Pulaski clerk practice of not filing IFP petitions and denials of those petitions)