Ark. Code Ann. § 16-17-704 (2026)
Jurisdiction — Civil Cases
The district courts shall have subject matter jurisdiction as established by Supreme Court rule.
History. Acts 1987, No. 431, § 4; 1993, No. 961, § 1; 1997, No. 746, § 1; 2003, No. 1185, §§ 163, 164.
Cross References. District court generally, § 16-17-132.
Jurisdiction of circuit courts, Ark. Const. Amend. 80, §§ 6, 19.
Effective Dates. Acts 2003, No. 1185, § 164: effective Jan. 1, 2005, by its own terms.
Research References
U. Ark. Little Rock L.J.
Survey — Civil Procedure, 12 U. Ark. Little Rock L.J. 135.
Legislative Survey, Civil Procedure, 16 U. Ark. Little Rock L.J. 85.
Case Notes
Constitutionality.
While former subdivision (a)(6) of this section does provide for concurrent jurisdiction, nothing in Acts 1987, No. 431 suggests an intent by the legislature to abrogate the constitutional right to a trial by jury in tort actions triable in circuit court. To the contrary, § 16-17-703, which deals with appeals from municipal court (now district court), clearly demonstrates the legislature's concern that the right secured by Ark. Const., Art. 2, § 7 not be diminished. McClanahan v. Gibson, 296 Ark. 304, 756 S.W.2d 889 (1988).
Appeal.
Arkansas law, constitutional and statutory, provides municipal courts with no authority to hear and decide actions concerning damages to land. Accordingly, a municipal court lacks subject matter jurisdiction of a trespass on land action, and because the municipal court has no jurisdiction cause, the circuit court acquires none on appeal. Miles v. Southern, 297 Ark. 274, 760 S.W.2d 868 (1988).
Fraud.
Legal malpractice action brought against an attorney in the small claims division of the municipal court was really a claim based on fraud and, as such, the municipal court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction; the circuit court's summary judgment in favor of the attorney was proper because it could not acquire subject-matter jurisdiction on appeal, however, the court could consider the defense of lack of subject-matter jurisdiction or failure to state a claim on a summary judgment motion, pursuant to Ark. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and (6). French v. Webb, 80 Ark. App. 357, 96 S.W.3d 740 (2003).
Personal Property.
Whether personal property becomes a fixture by annexation to the land depends upon the annexer's manifested intention, which can be shown by material considerations such as the character of the fixture as related to the use to which the land is being put and the manner in which the property is attached to the land. Sanders v. Putman, 315 Ark. 251, 866 S.W.2d 827 (1993).
Trial by Jury.
In a tort case in circuit court, there is a right to trial by jury regardless of the amount in controversy. McClanahan v. Gibson, 296 Ark. 304, 756 S.W.2d 889 (1988).
Persons are not entitled to a jury trial in municipal court except that such right to a jury trial remains inviolate when they pursue their appeal to circuit court where their case is to be tried de novo. Edwards v. City of Conway, 300 Ark. 135, 777 S.W.2d 583 (1989); State v. Roberts, 321 Ark. 31, 900 S.W.2d 175 (1995).
Cited: Coleman v. Watt, 40 F.3d 255 (8th Cir. 1994); State v. Webb, 323 Ark. 80, 913 S.W.2d 259 (1996).