Bernice Rutland v. Todd C. Stewart, Individually; Todd C. Stewart, D.D.S., P.A.; And Rock Dental, Arkansas, Pllc D/B/A Helena Family Dental

── Bernice Rutland v. Todd C. Stewart, Individually; Todd C. Stewart, D.D.S., P.A.; And Rock Dental, Arkansas, Pllc D/B/A Helena Family Dental ── Court: Court of Appeals of Arkansas Date: April 08, 2026 Category: General Cite as 2026 Ark. App. 218 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION III No. CV-25-36 BERNICE RUTLAND Opinion Delivered April 8, 2026 APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE PHILLIPS COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT V. [NO. 54CV-23-169] TODD C. STEWART, INDIVIDUALLY; HONORABLE CHALK S. MITCHELL, TODD C. STEWART, D.D.S., P.A.; AND JUDGE ROCK DENTAL ARKANSAS, PLLC, D/B/A HELENA FAMILY DENTAL APPELLEES DISMISSED ROBERT J. GLADWIN, Judge Appellant, Bernice Rutland, has appealed the Phillips County Circuit Court’s dismissal with prejudice of her medical-malpractice claims related to dental treatment against the appellees, Todd C. Stewart, individually; Todd C. Stewart, D.D.S., P.A.; and Rock Dental Arkansas, PLLC, d/b/a Helena Family Dental (collectively referred to as “the appellees”). On appeal, Rutland maintains that she demonstrated good cause in her motion for extension of time to serve and served the appellees before the order was revoked; thus, the circuit court erred by dismissing her case. Additionally, she argues that the circuit court exhibited bias and prejudice toward her and should have recused. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.  I. Background Facts On September 6, 2023, Rutland refiled a suit against the appellees that she voluntarily dismissed in 2022. Her complaint alleged medical malpractice related to dental treatment she received from separate appellee Todd C. Stewart between 2000 and January 21, 2020, as well as a breach-of-contract claim. On January 6, 2024, Rutland faxed the Phillips County Circuit Court clerk a motion for extension of time to serve the appellees—it was filed on the next business day, January 8. The circuit court granted the motion to extend on January 11. The appellees filed a combined motion to set aside the order granting Rutland’s motion for an extension of time for service and a motion to dismiss on January 24 arguing that service was not perfected within 120 days and, furthermore, that Rutland’s motion requesting the extension was untimely and failed to demonstrate good cause. In response, Rutland maintained that her request for an extension was timely and made several assertions that she satisfied the need for a contemporaneous showing of good cause. Rutland filed an amended complaint on March 22. Thereafter, she obtained service of the amended complaint on separate appellee Todd Stewart, D.D.S., P.A., on March 28, and on separate appellees Rock Dental Arkansas, PLLC, and Todd Stewart, individually, on April 3. Appellees filed motions to dismiss the amended complaint and argued that it did not cure Rutland’s failure to serve them within 120 days or her failure to demonstrate good cause in the motion. Rutland responded, explaining that she “had given responsibility of serving Defendant[s] to a law firm” and was not notified until January 4 that the summons and complaint had not been served. She alleged that she made diligent efforts thereafter to 2 contact a process server; however, there was not enough time to serve the summons and original complaint. On August 9, 2024, the circuit court held a hearing on appellees’ combined motion to dismiss and to set aside the order granting Rutland’s motion for extension. After hearing the arguments of both parties, the circuit court agreed that Rutland had failed to demonstrate good cause in her motion for extension of time to serve the appellees. Accordingly, because Rutland failed to properly serve the appell