Arkansas Code Annotated

Ark. Code Ann. § 16-7-202 (2026)

Duty and authority of the courts

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaArk. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
    1. It is the duty of each trial and appellate court of this state and each court is hereby vested with the authority to encourage the settlement of cases and controversies pending before it by suggesting the referral of a case or controversy to an appropriate dispute resolution process agreeable to the parties.
    2. On motion of all the parties, the court must make such an order of reference and continue the case or controversy pending the outcome of the selected dispute resolution process.
  1. In addition, each circuit and appellate court of this state is vested with the authority to order any civil, juvenile, probate, or domestic relations case or controversy pending before it to mediation.
  2. If a case or controversy is ordered to mediation, the parties may:
    1. Choose an appropriate mediator from a roster provided by the Arkansas Alternative Dispute Resolution Commission of those mediators who meet the commission's requirement guidelines for that type of case; or
    2. Select a mediator not on the commission's roster, if approved by the court.
    1. A party may move to dispense with the order to mediate for good cause shown.
    2. For purposes of this subsection, “good cause shown” shall include, but not be limited to, a party's inability to pay the costs of mediation.
  3. Each court is further granted the discretionary authority to make at the request of a party appropriate orders to confirm and enforce the results produced by the dispute resolution process.

History. Acts 1993, No. 641, § 2; 2003, No. 1179, § 1.

A.C.R.C. Notes. This section was formerly codified as § 16-7-102.

Research References

U. Ark. Little Rock L. Rev.

Survey of Legislation, 2003 Arkansas General Assembly, Practice, Procedure, and Courts, Mediation, 26 U. Ark. Little Rock L. Rev. 448.

Case Notes

Constitutionality.

Writ of prohibition was denied in a case challenging the constitutionality of subsection (b) of this section because a circuit court had jurisdiction to hear a motion relating to estate administration due to Ark. Const., Amend. 80, § 6, and the constitutionality of a statute could have been heard by a circuit court and appealed. Ellis v. Reynolds, 368 Ark. 572, 247 S.W.3d 845 (2007).

Abuse of Discretion.

After the parties failed to reach an agreement during mediation and did not agree on which issues had been mediated, the circuit court abused its discretion in failing to hold a hearing and in dismissing portions of the wife's motion to compel concerning issues that the parties agreed were mediated. Smyth v. Smyth, 2019 Ark. App. 12, 570 S.W.3d 472 (2019).

Circuit court's directive was to schedule mediation within 10 days, which was done, but when the circuit court learned the mediation was not scheduled to occur for approximately two and a half months, it amended the directive to have the mediation take place within 10 days; dismissing the wife's contempt petition because mediation did not take place within 10 days was an abuse of discretion, as the wife was not dilatory in scheduling the mediation, and this short window was punitive. Smyth v. Smyth, 2019 Ark. App. 12, 570 S.W.3d 472 (2019).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 2007–2020 · leading case: Ellis v. Reynolds, 247 S.W.3d 845 (Ark. 2007).
Ellis v. Reynolds, 247 S.W.3d 845 (Ark. 2007). · cites it 4× “…1 His sole basis for the petition is that the circuit court’s referral of his estate matter to mediation, pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 16-7-202 (b) (Supp. 2005), was in derogation of Article 2, §§ 7 and 13, and Article 4, §§ 1 and 2, of the Arkansas Constitution. We deny the…”
Linn v. Miller, 261 S.W.3d 471 (Ark. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “We see nothing in the mediation statute, Ark. Code Ann. § 16-7-202 (Supp. 2003) to suggest that it gives a court continuing jurisdiction over all potential aspects of a case more than ninety days after entry of a final decree.”
Lawrence C. Bandy, M.D., & Arkansas Gyn Oncology, P.A. v. Mildred Vick, 2020 Ark. 334 (Ark. 2020). · cites it 5× “Arkansas Code Annotated § 16-7-202, “Duty and authority of the courts,” provides in pertinent part: (a)(1) It is the duty of each trial and appellate court of this state and each court is hereby vested with the authority to encourage the settlement of cases and controversies…”
Smyth v. Smyth, 570 S.W.3d 472 (Ark. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “" Ark. Code Ann. § 16-7-202 (b). Additionally, when parties to a divorce action have minor children residing with one or both parties, the court, prior to or after entering a decree of divorce, may require the parties to submit to mediation in regard to addressing parenting,…”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 16-7-202(e) — 1 case
Lawrence C. Bandy, M.D., & Arkansas Gyn Oncology, P.A. v. Mildred Vick, 2020 Ark. 334 (Ark. 2020). “Arkansas Code Annotated § 16-7-202, “Duty and authority of the courts,” provides in pertinent part: (a)(1) It is the duty of each trial and appellate court of this state and each court is hereby vested with the authority to encourage the settlement of cases and controversies…”
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.