There shall be one form of action to be known as "civil action."
Rule 2.One Form of Action
Last amended July 1, 2001 · Last verified July 13, 2026
In one sentenceRule 2 merges every civil claim into a single "civil action," ending the old split between suits at law and suits in equity.
Full Text of Rule 2
Amendment History
Amended May 24, 2001, effective July 1, 2001.
Reporter's Notes
Addition to Reporter’s Notes, 2001 Amendment: The second sentence, which provided that actions in equity were to be brought in chancery court and actions at law in circuit court, has been deleted in conformity with Constitutional Amendment 80, under which the circuit courts are the state’s "trial courts of original jurisdiction." The effect of this change in the rule is to merge law and equity, as contemplated by Amendment 80. As the U.S. Supreme Court observed with respect to the corresponding federal rule, "law and equity are procedurally combined; nothing turns now upon the form of the action or the procedural devices by which the parties happen to come before the court." Ross v. Bernhard, 396 U.S. 531, 540 (1970).
The merged system is to be contrasted with and distinguished from the prior practice in Arkansas during the period in which chancery courts had not been created in all counties. In counties without chancery courts, the circuit court "was a court of dual jurisdiction, the judge presiding in one division or ‘on the law side’ as a superior court of common law, and also sitting in chancery as judge of a court of equity...." Morgan Utilities, Inc. v. Perry County, 183 Ark. 542, 547, 37 S.W.2d 74, 77 (1931). With the merger of law and equity, there are not separate law and equity "sides" of the circuit court.
Although law and equity have been merged, equitable principles may be applied where appropriate. This has been so in the federal courts. E.g., Stainback v. Mo Hock Ke Lok Po, 336 U.S. 368, 382 n.26 (1949) ("Notwithstanding the fusion of law and equity by the Rules of Civil Procedure, the substantive principles of Courts of Chancery remain unaffected"); In re United States Brass Corp., 110 F.3d 1261, 1267 (7th Cir. 1997) ("Ever since law and equity were merged in the federal courts ... more than a half century ago, the courts have had a free hand in importing equitable defenses into suits at law"). Moreover, the merger does not alter substantive rights. Grupo Mexicano de Desarrollo, S.A. v. Alliance Bond Fund, Inc., 527 U.S. 308, 322 (1999).
Plain-English Summary
Rule 2 sounds modest — one sentence declaring that every civil claim goes forward under a single label, "civil action" — but it erased a real historical line. Before Arkansas's courts reorganized under Constitutional Amendment 80, cases seeking money damages traditionally went to circuit court "on the law side," while cases seeking an injunction, a declaratory judgment, or another equitable remedy went to a separate chancery court. Rule 2 folded that dual system into one: a single circuit court hearing both law and equity claims through one procedural track.
Merging law and equity changed how cases move through the system, not what remedies a party can seek. A plaintiff can still ask for an injunction, specific performance, or another equitable remedy in the same civil action that seeks damages, without filing in a different court or under different procedures. Equitable principles and defenses remain available where they fit; the merger only ended the need to characterize a case up front as one or the other.
For anyone reading an older Arkansas case that refers to a "chancery" proceeding or the "law side" of the circuit court, Rule 2 explains the shift: those labels describe practice before the merger, not how a case is filed and litigated today.
Frequently Asked Questions
What did Rule 2 change?
It ended the practice of routing law claims and equity claims to different courts or different divisions. Under the current rule, every civil claim — whether it seeks damages, an injunction, or a declaration of rights — proceeds as a single "civil action" in circuit court.
Can I still ask for an injunction or other equitable remedy?
Yes. Merging law and equity did not eliminate equitable remedies or equitable defenses; it removed the need to bring them in a separate court. A plaintiff can combine a claim for damages with a request for injunctive relief in one action.
Does "civil action" cover claims that used to be equity claims?
Yes. The label applies without regard to whether the underlying claim would once have been filed at law or in equity. There are no longer separate law and equity "sides" of the circuit court.
Why does this rule still matter decades after the merger?
Because Arkansas case law from before the merger still gets cited, and understanding whether a case predates or postdates Amendment 80 helps explain why it refers to chancery court, the law side, or procedures that no longer exist in current practice.
Source & verification. Rule text, Reporter's Notes, and amendment
history are reproduced verbatim from the Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure, prescribed by
the Arkansas Supreme Court. The plain-English summary is original and written by us.
Last verified July 13, 2026. ·
Official source
Also known as: law and equity merger arkansasone form of action arkansascivil action arkansas rule 2chancery court merged into circuit court arkansas