JAMES TOLAND AND FIRST ARKANSAS BAIL BONDS, INC. APPELLANTS
MIKE ROBINSON, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS DISTRICT JUDGE OF SALINE COUNTY, BENTON [DEPARTMENT]; AND STEPHANIE CASADY, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS DISTRICT JUDGE OF SALINE COUNTY, BRYANT [DEPARTMENT] APPELLEES
FROM THE SALINE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. 63CV-14-631]
HONORABLE TED CAPEHEART, JUDGE
Worsham Law Firm, P.A., by: Richard E. Worsham, for
Rutledge, Att'y Gen., by: Daniel L. McFadden, Ass't
Att'y Gen., for appellees.
DAN KEMP, Chief Justice
James Toland (Toland) and First Arkansas Bail Bonds, Inc.
(First Arkansas) (collectively, appellants), appeal an order
of the Saline County Circuit Court granting a motion to
dismiss filed by appellees Mike Robinson (Robinson), in his
official capacity as District Judge of Saline County, Benton
[Department]; and Stephanie Casady (Casady), in her
official capacity as District Judge of Saline County, Bryant
[Department] (collectively, appellees). For reversal,
appellants argue that the circuit court erred in granting
appellees' motion to dismiss for lack of standing and for
failure to state a cause of action. We dismiss the appeal as
was arrested on a felony charge. On September 2, 2014, Toland
appeared before Robinson for his pretrial-release decision.
Robinson set a "sheriff's bond" under Rule
9.2(b)(ii) of the Arkansas Rules of Criminal Procedure and
ordered that Toland post bond in the amount of $25, 000.
Someone on Toland's behalf paid 10 percent of the bond to
the Saline County Sheriff, and Toland was released from the
Saline County Detention Center. At no point did Toland object
to the bond prior to posting it and being released. Ninety
percent of his bond amount was refunded when he appeared at
his next court date. Toland pleaded guilty to his criminal
charge and was taken into the custody of the Arkansas
Department of Correction.
October 14, 2014, appellants filed a complaint against
appellees and separate defendant Saline County (dismissed
below), alleging that the circuit court should have issued
(1) a writ of mandamus to compel appellees to allow
defendants to obtain a surety bond pursuant to article 2,
section 8 of the Arkansas Constitution, (2) a writ of
prohibition preventing appellees from violating the rights of
individuals incarcerated in the Saline County Detention
Center by refusing to allow them to use a bail-bond company
to obtain their release, and (3) a writ of certiorari finding
that appellees had exceeded their judicial authority by
requiring Rule 9.2(b)(ii) bonds. Appellants sought a
declaratory judgment finding that appellees had violated
article 2, section 8 of the Arkansas Constitution by failing
to allow the defendants to use a licensed bail-bond company.
Appellants also alleged two civil-rights violations: (1) that
appellees violated Toland's constitutional right to use a
bail-bond company pursuant to article 2, section 2 of the
Arkansas Constitution; and (2) that appellees violated First
Arkansas's constitutional rights under article 2,
sections 2, 22, and 29 of the Arkansas Constitution.
Appellants also requested damages, attorney's fees, and
responded by filing a motion to dismiss and argued that
appellants' claims were barred by judicial immunity and
sovereign immunity,  that Toland had waived his right to
challenge the bail decision by accepting the bond, that First
Arkansas lacked standing to challenge the bond, and that the
extraordinary writs did not apply in this case.
filed a motion for voluntary dismissal of their civil-rights
claims pursuant to Rule 41(a) of the Arkansas Rules of Civil
Procedure, and the circuit court entered an order dismissing
those claims without prejudice. Appellants also filed a
motion for voluntary dismissal of Saline County in accordance
with Rule 41(a), and the circuit court dismissed Saline
County from the action without prejudice.
circuit court held a hearing on appellees' motion to
dismiss. On October 15, 2015, the circuit court entered an
order finding that (1) appellants did not have standing to
seek a declaratory judgment pursuant to article 2, section 8
of the Arkansas Constitution; (2) appellants'
declaratory-judgment claim was moot because Toland had paid
his sheriff's bond; 90 percent of that payment was
refunded when he appeared for his court date; and Toland had
pleaded guilty and remained in the custody of the Arkansas
Department of Correction; (3) First Arkansas lacked standing
because it had not been denied the opportunity to pay
Toland's bond, and its status as a bail-bonding company
had not conferred standing; (4) Casady had not ordered
Toland's bond, Toland had not appeared in Casady's
court, and no causal relationship existed between Casady and
any injury alleged by Toland; (5) neither Toland nor First
Arkansas had stated a claim for which the extraordinary writs
could be granted; (6) mandamus was inappropriate because
Robinson had the discretion to order a sheriff's bond;
(7) prohibition was inappropriate because Robinson had
jurisdiction to order the sheriff's bond; and (8)
certiorari was inappropriate because Robinson had not abused
his discretion in ordering the sheriff's bond pursuant to
Rule 9.2(b). The circuit court granted appellees' motion
to dismiss and dismissed without prejudice all claims against
appellees. Appellants timely filed their notice of appeal.
Toland v. Robinson, 2017 Ark. 41, we concluded that
the circuit court had not provided a Rule 54(b) certification
that the civil-rights claims had been nonsuited. We held that
the circuit court's order was not final and that we did
not have jurisdiction to address the merits on appeal.
Accordingly, we dismissed the appeal without prejudice.
On October 8, 2018, the circuit court entered a final order,
1. This Court entered a judgment dismissing the case with
prejudice on October 15, 2015.
2. [Toland and First Arkansas] filed a timely notice of
appeal and sought review by the appellate courts.
3. On February 16, 2017, the Supreme Court issued a mandate
dismissing the appeal without prejudice since there was not a
final order. James Toland, et al. v. Mike Robinson, et
al., CV-16-119. The Supreme Court determined that there
was not a final order since the Civil Rights claims raised in
Count Five of the complaint [were] dismissed without
4. The mandate has been filed with this Court and no final
order has been entered based upon the findings of the Supreme
5.It is the desire of [Toland and First Arkansas] to have the
Civil Rights claims raised in Count Five of the complaint
dismissed with prejudice in order ...