Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Rebecca Nichols v. James Swindoll and Chuck Gibson
Citation: 2022 Ark. App. 399
Court: Court of Appeals of Arkansas; October 5, 2022; Arkansas; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
Rebecca Nichols appealed the dismissal of her legal-malpractice lawsuit against attorneys James Swindoll and Chuck Gibson, which the circuit court had dismissed based on a three-year statute of limitations and failure to adequately plead fraudulent concealment. The Arkansas Court of Appeals reaffirmed its prior decision in Nichols v. Swindoll, 2022 Ark. App. 233. In response to dissenting opinions, the majority clarified that they applied the correct "abuse of discretion" standard of review, as established by Arkansas Supreme Court precedent, despite the dissent arguing for a "de novo" standard. The dissenting judges raised concerns about the duty of attorneys to communicate potential legal errors and suggested revisiting the precedent set in Rice v. Ragsdale, which limits the fiduciary duty of attorneys regarding the disclosure of potential malpractice. The majority maintained that Nichols did not challenge the Rice precedent in her appeal and emphasized that Arkansas law requires sufficient facts in a complaint to support claims of fraudulent concealment to toll the statute of limitations. The majority stood by their original ruling, with dissenting opinions expressing disagreement but not presenting new arguments from the appellant. Judges Abramson, Whiteaker, and Brown agreed with the majority, while Chief Judge Harrison and Judge Hixson dissented. Judge Gruber did not participate in the decision.