Ark. Code Ann. » Title 16 Chapter 60
Arkansas Code Annotated

Ark. Code Ann. § 16-60-101 (2026)

Venue in circuit courts — General rules and exceptions

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaArk. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
  1. A civil action other than a civil action mentioned in §§ 16-60-102 — 16-60-109, 16-106-101, and specific venue provisions codified in another title of the Arkansas Code shall be brought in any of the following counties:
    1. The county in which a substantial part of the event or omission giving rise to the cause of action occurred;
      1. The county in which an individual defendant resided at the time of the event or omission giving rise to the cause of action.
      2. If the defendant is an entity other than an individual, the civil action shall be brought in the county where the entity had its principal office in this state at the time of the event or omission giving rise to the cause of action; or
      1. The county in which the plaintiff resided at the time of the event or omission giving rise to the cause of action.
      2. If the plaintiff is an entity other than an individual, the civil action shall be brought in the county where the plaintiff had its principal office in this state at the time of the event or omission giving rise to the cause of action.
    1. The residence of a properly joined named class representative may be considered in determining proper venue in a class action.
    2. The residence of a putative or actual member of a class other than a named representative shall not be considered in determining proper venue for a class action.
  3. In a civil action with multiple plaintiffs, venue shall be proper as to each named plaintiff joined in the civil action unless:
    1. The plaintiffs establish that they assert any right to relief against the defendant jointly, severally, or arising out of the same transaction or occurrence; and
    2. The existence of a substantial number of questions of law or material fact common to all the plaintiffs not only will arise in the civil action, but also that:
      1. The common questions of law or material fact will predominate over individual questions of law or material fact pertaining to each plaintiff;
      2. The civil action can be maintained more efficiently and economically for all parties than if prosecuted separately; and
      3. The interest of justice supports the joinder of the parties as plaintiffs in one (1) civil action.
    1. Unless venue objections are waived by the defendant or by unanimous agreement of multiple defendants, if venue is improper for any plaintiff joined in the civil action, then the claim of the plaintiff shall be severed and transferred to a court where venue is proper.
      1. If severance and transfer is mandated and venue is appropriate in more than one (1) court, a defendant sued alone or multiple defendants, by unanimous agreement, may select another court to which the civil action shall be transferred.
      2. If there are multiple defendants who are unable to agree on another court, the court in which the civil action was originally filed may transfer the action to another court.
  5. When venue is proper as to one (1) defendant, it is also proper as to any other defendant with respect to all causes of action arising out of the same transaction or occurrence.

History. Acts 2015, No. 830, § 2.

Publisher's Notes. Former § 16-60-101 has been amended and renumbered as § 16-60-102.

Case Notes

Construction.

Because an insurer was the first party to file suit, and it chose to do so in the county in which it had its principal office, a circuit judge erred by applying the doctrine of forum non conveniens under § 16-4-101(D), effectively overruling the insurer's choice of venue. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. of Ark. v. Gadbury-Swift, 2010 Ark. 6, 362 S.W.3d 291 (2010) (decided under former § 16-55-213).

Improper Venue.

Where a writ of prohibition entered in the court's prior decision required the circuit court to dismiss the representative of the Arkansas consumers from the case, no basis existed for venue over the only remaining named plaintiff; venue was not proper because the remaining plaintiff was a resident of Texas. Centerpoint Energy, Inc. v. Miller County Circuit Court, 372 Ark. 343, 276 S.W.3d 231 (2008).

Dismissal for improper venue under Ark. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(3) of a complaint alleging fraud in the inducement of contract was not erroneous because forum-selection clauses designated Kansas as governing law and in both Arkansas and Kansas a party had to plead fraud in the inducement of a forum-selection clause itself to avoid its application Provence v. Nat'l Carriers, Inc., 2010 Ark. 27, 360 S.W.3d 725 (2010) (decision under prior law).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1994–2025 · leading case: Desoto Gathering Co. v. Ramsey, 2016 Ark. 22 (Ark. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Desoto Gathering Co. v. Ramsey, 2016 Ark. 22 (Ark. 2016). · cites it 6× “In its motion, DeSoto contended that, pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 16-60-101 (Repl. 2005), property-based causes of action were required to be filed where the real property was located.”
Arnold v. Spears, 36 S.W.3d 346 (Ark. 2001). · cites it 2× “The Arnolds next contend that the chancellor is attempting to assert jurisdiction over them in a divorce case when venue for the landlord-tenant matter properly lies in Crawford County under Ark. Code Ann. §§ 16-60-101 and 16-60-102 (1987).”
River Bar Farms, L.L.C. v. Moore, 118 S.W.3d 145 (Ark. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 4× “Appellants moved to dismiss on the ground that venue lay in Perry County, where appellants’ land is located, citing Ark. Code Ann. § 16-60-101 (1987). In this motion, appellants stated that they did not contest the injunctive relief.”
Arkansas Game & Fish Comm'n v. Harkey, 45 S.W.3d 829 (Ark. 2001). · cites it 2× “§ 16-60-103 (3) (1987), which provides that all actions against state boards, state commissioners, or state officers on account of official acts must be brought in Pulaski County, and Ark. Code Ann. § 16-60-101 (d) (1987), which provides that “all actions against the board,…”
Dotson v. City of Lowell, 289 S.W.3d 55 (Ark. 2008). “” Although the act primarily focused on tort reform, Act 649 contained the following venue provision now codified at Arkansas Code Annotated section 16-55-213(a): (a) All civil actions other than those mentioned in §§ 16-60-101 —16-60-103,16-60-107,16-60-114, and 16-60-115, and…”
Ison Props., LLC v. Wood, 156 S.W.3d 742 (Ark. Ct. App. 2004). “It states in relevant part: “An action, other than those in §§ 16-60-101 — 16-60-103, against a corporation created by the laws of this state may be brought in the county in which it is situated or has its principal office or place ofbusiness, or in which its chief officer…”
Wright v. Centerpoint Energy Resources Corp., 276 S.W.3d 253 (Ark. 2008). · cites it 2× “1 The six statutes are Ark. Code Ann. §§ 16-60-101 to -103,16-60-107,16-60-114, and 16-60-115, and subsection (e) of § 16-55-213.”
Kimberly Ruloph v. Lammico, 2025 Ark. App. 350 (Ark. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 33× “Venue Statute The two venue statutes at issue are Ark. Code Ann. §§ 16-60-101 and -105 (Supp.”
McCutchen v. Arkansas State Police, 307 S.W.3d 582 (Ark. 2009). · cites it 3× “g actions must be brought in the county in which the seat of government is situated: [[Image here]] (3) All actions against the state and all actions against state boards, state commissioners, or state officers on account of their official acts, except that if an action could…”
Pryor v. Raper, 877 S.W.2d 952 (Ark. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 2× “Therefore, we held that under Ark. Code Ann. § 16-60-101 (1987) the suit could be brought in either county.”
Two Bros. Farm, Inc. v. Riceland Foods, Inc., 940 S.W.2d 889 (Ark. Ct. App. 1997). “§ 16-60-105 , which reads: An action other than those mentioned in §§ 16-60-101, 16-60-102, 16-60-106 - 16-60-108, 16-60-110, against a person, firm, copartnership, or association engaged in business in this state which has or maintains more than one (1) office or place of…”
Twp. Builders, Inc. v. City of Gravette, Arkansas, & Employers Mut. Cas. Co., 2022 Ark. App. 261 (Ark. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 4× “Ark. Code Ann. § 16-60-101 . In contrast, Arkansas Code Annotated section 16-60-106 (Repl.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
— Ark. Code Ann. § 16-60-101(4) — 2 cases
Desoto Gathering Co. v. Ramsey, 2016 Ark. 22 (Ark. 2016). “In its motion, DeSoto contended that, pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 16-60-101 (Repl. 2005), property-based causes of action were required to be filed where the real property was located.”
Phifer v. SEECO Inc., 2014 Ark. App. 211 (Ark. Ct. App. 2014).
— Ark. Code Ann. § 16-60-101(a) — 1 case
Kimberly Ruloph v. Lammico, 2025 Ark. App. 350 (Ark. Ct. App. 2025). “Venue Statute The two venue statutes at issue are Ark. Code Ann. §§ 16-60-101 and -105 (Supp.”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 16-60-101(e) — 1 case
Kimberly Ruloph v. Lammico, 2025 Ark. App. 350 (Ark. Ct. App. 2025). “Venue Statute The two venue statutes at issue are Ark. Code Ann. §§ 16-60-101 and -105 (Supp.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.