Opinion
CV-19-807
01-27-2021
MITCHELL "MITCH" WINE APPELLANT v. DORALEE CHANDLER AND LESLIE RUTLEDGE, IN THEIR CAPACITIES AS DIRECTOR OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL DIVISION OF THE ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION AND ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ARKANSAS, RESPECTIVELY; AND PUBLIC CONSULTING GROUP, INC. APPELLEES
Mitchell Wine, pro se appellant. Quattlebaum, Grooms & Tull PLLC, by: Michael N. Shannon, for separate appellee Public Consulting Group, Inc.
APPEAL FROM THE PULASKI COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, NINTH DIVISION [NO. 60CV-19-510] HONORABLE MARY SPENCER MCGOWAN, JUDGE MOTIONS DENIED PER CURIAM
On September 16, 2020, this court reversed and remanded a judgment entered in the Circuit Court of Pulaski County in favor of appellant, Mitchell Wine. See Wine v. Chandler, 2020 Ark. App. 412, 607 S.W.3d 522. As a result of the reversal, this court awarded Wine costs in the amount of $1958.60. After our mandate issued, the case was remanded to the Circuit Court of Pulaski County.
Appellee, Public Consulting Group (PCG) filed a motion for reconsideration of the award of costs. On December 9, 2020, this court denied PCG's motion for reconsideration. On remand, the case was apparently summarily disposed of by the circuit court in favor of PCG. Appellee, PCG then filed a supplemental motion for reconsideration of costs on December 28, 2020, and, in its motion, argued inter alia that because it prevailed in the remanded case in circuit court, we should reconsider the previous award of costs. The reference therein to activity in the case below while jurisdiction was remanded to circuit court was improper.
Appellant, Mitchell Wine filed a response to the supplemental motion for reconsideration and therein alleged inter alia that PCG acted maliciously and was guilty of spoliation of evidence. Appellee, PCG has filed a motion for permission to file a response for the purpose of defending Wine's allegations of spoliation and other malfeasances. Wine has filed a response to PCG's motion for permission to file its response.
It is the holding of this court that PCG's supplemental motion for reconsideration of costs filed on December 28, 2020, is hereby denied. In determining the disposition of this motion, this court has not relied on any motion or response filed after December 28, 2020, and all subsequent motions are hereby denied.
HARRISON, C.J., dissents without written opinion.
ABRAMSON, J., not participating.
Mitchell Wine, pro se appellant.
Quattlebaum, Grooms & Tull PLLC, by: Michael N. Shannon, for separate appellee Public Consulting Group, Inc.