Litigation

Dardanelle Case Against Russellville Dismissed Because a Joint Resolution is not a Contract

By H. William Allen et al.

The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed dismissal in City of Dardanelle v. City of Russellville, No. 07-195 (2/28/08).

This case involves a long-standing dispute about where Russellville can build a sewage pipeline. They originally chose a location near Dardanelle City Park. Dardanelle protested and proposed a location further downstream that would have cost an additional $6 million to build (which Russellville did not have). On May 10, 2002, after years of disagreement, the parties signed a Joint Resolution where they agreed to work together to get funding to build the pipeline at Dardanelle's suggested location.

The parties worked together until 2006, but they were unable to obtain additional funding. Russellville then obtained its permit to build the pipeline at the original location. Dardanelle filed suit, claiming the Joint Resolution was a binding contract that Russellville breached. The trial court dismissed the claim, finding the Joint Resolution was not a contract. The supreme court affirmed, stating the Joint Resolution was too vague to be a contract.

Full post as published by Arkansas Business Litigation Blog on March 03, 2008 (boomark / email).