district court should not have dismissed their claims against T/C LLC with prejudice. In Cole v. First National Bank of Fort Smith, 304 Ark. 26, 800 S.W.2d 412, 413-14 (1990), the Arkansas Supreme Court held that the plaintiff had completed service for purposes of the savings statute when it sent the complaint and summons by certified mail addressed to the defendant at his post office box, and the defendant’s stepdaughter accepted service and signed the return receipt. Although the trial court found that service had been perfected, the Arkansas Supreme Court held that the defendant’s stepdaughter was not his agent and thus that service had not been perfected. Id. at 414. Nevertheless, the Arkansas Supreme Court held that the savings statute applied. Id. Somewhat similarly, 52 (1994) (<HOLDING>). We believe that the Arkansas Supreme Court
recognizing texas procedural rules and due process dictate judgment may not be rendered unless defendant was served waived service or made general appearance holding that the plaintiffs did not complete service for purposes of the savings statute when they served the defendant with a complaint signed by an unlicensed attorney a nullity under arkansas law and made no attempt to serve the defendant with the amended complaint holding that the plaintiff did not complete service when she made no attempt to serve the defendant within the time required by the arkansas procedural rules holding that the defendants failure to timely serve a notice of appeal and docketing statement did not prejudice the plaintiff and therefore would not serve as a basis to dismiss the appeal holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion when it dismissed the case without prejudice because the plaintiff failed to properly serve the defendant within 120 days after filing the complaint