White River Health Sys., Inc. v. Long

4 Citing cases

  1. St. Bernard's Cmty. Hosp. Corp. v. Cheney

    2021 Ark. App. 236 (Ark. Ct. App. 2021)   Cited 1 times   1 Legal Analyses

    2(a)(2) (providing that an appeal may be taken from an order that in effect determines the action and prevents a judgment from which the appeal might be taken). We acknowledge that in White River Health Systems, Inc. v. Long, 2018 Ark. App. 284, 551, S.W.3d 389, cited by Cheney, we created a narrow exception to this rule when the order denying summary judgment on charitable immunity specifically bifurcates the charitable-immunity issue and the liability issue. However, this exception does not apply here because in the order denying CrossRidge's summary-judgment motion, the trial court did not bifurcate the proceedings.

  2. Eldridge v. Waugh

    2022 Ark. App. 241 (Ark. Ct. App. 2022)

    It is well established that a denial of a summary judgment is not a final, appealable order. White River Health Sys., Inc. v. Long, 2018 Ark.App. 284, 551 S.W.3d 389.

  3. Rain Invs. v. Vu

    2022 Ark. App. 93 (Ark. Ct. App. 2022)   Cited 2 times
    In Rain Investments LLC v. Vu, 2022 Ark.App. 93, we held that we lacked jurisdiction to hear some of the appellant's arguments and ordered Rain Investments to submit a supplemental record along with a supplemental brief and addendum.

    In fact, we have regularly held that, "generally, the denial of a motion for summary judgment is neither reviewable nor appealable." White River Health Sys., Inc. v. Long, 2018 Ark.App. 284, at 3, 551 S.W.3d 389, 391 (quoting Ark. Elder Outreach of Little Rock, Inc. v. Thompson, 2012 Ark.App. 681, at 4, 425 S.W.3d 779, 783). Similarly, we lack jurisdiction to hear Rain Investments' interlocutory appeal of the denial of its motion for default judgment.

  4. Davis Nursing Ass'n v. Neal

    2018 Ark. App. 413 (Ark. Ct. App. 2018)   Cited 2 times

    And it is another reason why I am increasingly persuaded that courts, not juries, should decide the immunity question while using a fair, clearly defined, and more efficient process. SeeGeorge , 337 Ark. 206, 987 S.W.2d 710 (charitable immunity is a question of law reviewed de novo on summary judgment); see alsoWhite River Health Sys., Inc. v. Long , 2018 Ark. App. 284, 551 S.W.3d 389 (Harrison, J., dissenting); Progressive Eldercare Servs.-Saline, Inc. v. Cauffiel , 2016 Ark. App. 523, 508 S.W.3d 59 (Harrison, J., concurring).