(a) Ninety-Day Limitation. To correct errors or mistakes or to prevent the miscarriage of justice, the court may modify or vacate a judgment, order or decree on motion of the court or any party, with prior notice to all parties, within ninety days of its having been filed with the clerk.
Rule 60.Relief from Judgment, Decree or Order
Last amended July 1, 2001 · Last verified July 13, 2026
In one sentenceRule 60 gives Arkansas trial courts ninety days to freely modify or vacate a judgment, lets clerical errors be fixed at any time, and beyond that spells out narrow, specific grounds -- fraud, newly discovered evidence, and more -- for reopening it later.
Full Text of Rule 60
(b) Exception; Clerical Errors. Notwithstanding subdivision (a) of this rule, the court may at any time, with prior notice to all parties, correct clerical mistakes in judgments, decrees, orders, or other parts of the record and errors therein arising from oversight or omission. During the pendency of an appeal, such mistakes may be so corrected before the appeal is docketed in the appellate court and thereafter while the appeal is pending may be so corrected with leave of the appellate court.
(c) Grounds for Setting Aside Judgment, Other Than Default Judgment, After Ninety Days. The court in which a judgment, other than a default judgment [which may be set aside in accordance with Rule 55(c)] has been rendered or order made shall have the power, after the expiration of ninety (90) days of the filing of said judgment with the clerk of the court, to vacate or modify such judgment or order:
(1) By granting a new trial where the grounds therefor were discovered after the expiration of ninety (90) days after the filing of the judgment, or, where the ground is newly discovered evidence which the moving party could not have discovered in time to file a motion under Rule 59(b), upon a motion for new trial filed with the clerk of the court not later than one year after discovery of the grounds or one year after the judgment was filed with the clerk of the court, whichever is the earlier; provided, notice of said motion has been served within the time limitations for filing the motion.
(2) By a new trial granted in proceedings against defendants constructively summoned, and who did not appear, upon a motion filed within two years after the filing of the judgment with the clerk of the court, or within one year after a certified copy of the judgment has been served upon the defendant, whichever shall be the earlier, upon security for costs being given; provided notice of the filing of said motion has been served upon the adverse party within the time limitations for filing the motion.
(3) For misprisions of the clerk.
(4) For misrepresentation or fraud (whether heretofore denominated intrinsic or extrinsic) by an adverse party.
(5) For erroneous proceedings against an infant or person of unsound mind where the condition of such defendant does not appear in the record, nor the error in the proceedings.
(6) For the death of one of the parties before the judgment in the action.
(7) For errors in a judgment shown by an infant within twelve (12) months after reaching the age of eighteen (18) years, upon a showing of cause.
(d) Valid Defense to Be Shown. No judgment against a defendant, unless it was rendered before the action stood for trial, shall be set aside under this rule unless the defendant in his motion asserts a valid defense to the action and, upon hearing, makes a prima facie showing of such defense.
(e) Valid Cause of Action to Be Shown. No judgment, unless it was rendered before the action stood for trial, shall be set aside on the motion of a plaintiff unless the plaintiff makes a prima facie showing of a valid cause of action.
(f) Defendant Constructively Summoned—Restoration of Property. When a judgment is set aside on the motion of a defendant constructively summoned, the court may order the plaintiff in the action to restore to the defendant any money of the defendant paid under the judgment or any property of the defendant obtained by the plaintiff under it and yet remaining in his possession and pay to the defendant the value of any property which may have been taken under an attachment in the action or under the judgment and not restored. The title of purchasers in good faith to any property sold under an attachment or judgment shall not be affected by a new trial under subsection (c)(2) of this rule, except the title of property obtained by the plaintiff and not bought of him in good faith by others.
(g) Exception for Divorce Decrees. No judgment granting a divorce, except as it relates to alimony, shall be set aside under subsection (c)(2) of this rule.
(h) Premature Judgment. Rendering judgment prior to the time fixed for filing an answer shall be deemed a clerical misprision. No misprision of the clerk shall be ground for appeal until relief has been sought in the circuit court and action taken there.
(i) Motion to Vacate or Modify May Be Heard First. The circuit court may first try and decide upon the grounds for vacating or modifying a judgment before trying or deciding the validity of the defense or cause of action.
(j) Injunction Pendente Lite. The party seeking to vacate or modify a judgment may obtain an injunction suspending proceedings, on the whole or in part, upon showing by affidavit or exhibition of the record that it is probable that he is entitled to have such judgment, decree or order vacated or modified; however, such a showing shall not be required if the judgment, decree or order was rendered before the action stood for trial.
(k) Independent Action to Set Aside Judgment—Writs Abolished. A motion under this rule does not affect the finality of a judgment or decree or suspend its operation, except as provided herein. This rule does not limit the power of a court to entertain an independent action to relieve a party from a judgment who was not actually personally served with process or to set aside a judgment or decree for fraud upon the court. Writs of coram nobis in civil cases, coram vobis, audita querela, and bills of review and bills in the nature of a bill of review, are abolished, and the procedure for obtaining any relief from a judgment or decree shall be by motion as prescribed in these rules or by an independent action.
Amendment History
Amended July 9, 1984, effective September 1, 1984; amended December 10, 1990, effective February 1, 1991; amended January 27, 2000; amended May 24, 2001, effective July 1, 2001.
Reporter's Notes
Reporter’s Notes to Rule 60: 1. This rule is substantially different from FRCP 60. Its purpose is to substantially retain existing Arkansas law on the subject. The Court feels that the adoption of FRCP 60 would detract from the stability of final judgments and that the changes which would be made in Arkansas law are highly undesirable. The distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic fraud as a basis for relief from a judgment is considered an important and desirable one.
2. This rule would make the same provision for relatively unlimited control of judgments by circuit courts as that made for chancery courts by Ark. Stat. Ann. §§ 22-406.1 et seq. (Repl. 1962). This makes for uniformity not only as between the two courts but also as among judgments in a particular court, regardless of the time elapsed between entry of the judgment and expiration of a term of court.
3. Under prior Arkansas law, the trial court lost jurisdiction to set aside or modify a judgment after term time except on those grounds specified in superseded Ark. Stat. Ann. § 29-506 (Repl. 1962). Davis v. McBride, 247 Ark. 895, 448 S.W.2d 37 (1969); Hardin v. Hardin, 237 Ark. 237, 372 S.W.2d 260 (1973). Under prior Arkansas law, the trial court had the power to correct, in certain instances, its judgment even after an appeal had been docketed in the Arkansas Supreme Court. Superseded Ark. Stat. Ann. § 27-2129.1 (Repl. 1962). Under this rule, however, once the appeal is docketed, a change can be made only with leave of the Supreme Court.
4. In subsection (c)(1) the one year limitation follows the recommendation of the Committee in its proposed Rule 60.
5. Subsection (k) follows Section (b) of FRCP 60 by permitting a court to entertain an independent action to relieve a party from a judgment. Bankers Mortgage Co. v. United States, 423 F. 2d 73 (C.C.A. 5th, 1970), cert. den., 90 S. Ct. 2242. Arkansas has previously recognized the power of an equity court to review a judgment from a court of law, although such power is severely limited. Cotton v. Hamblin, 233 Ark. 65, 342 S.W.2d 478 (1961).
6. Section (k) provides for the abolition of writs of error and bills of review. While these have not been common under prior Arkansas law, they have been permitted under Article 7, Section 4, of the Arkansas Constitution. However, any relief which could be granted by a court of equity under a bill of review can also be afforded under this rule; hence, it should have little effect on Arkansas practice and procedure.
Additions to Reporter’s Notes, 1984 Amendments: Rule 60(b) is modified to remove the references to the law prior to January 1, 1970, and to replace it with language from cases describing the broad power of a court to modify or set aside its judgment during the term of court in which it was entered. See Karoley v. A.R. & T. Electronics, 235 Ark. 609, 363 S.W.2d 120 (1962) and the cases cited in that opinion.
Rule 60(c)(5) is amended to remove "married women" from the classes of persons to which the Rule applies.
The caption of the Rule is amended to include "Modification."
Addition to Reporter’s Note, 1990 Amendment: Rule 60 has been amended to eliminate any overlap with Rule 55. Under former subdivision (c)(7) of Rule 60, a trial court could set aside a judgment "[f]or unavoidable casualty or misfortune preventing the party from appearing or defending." The 1990 amendment deletes this provision, which has been cited in default judgment cases. E.g., McGee v. Wilson, 275 Ark. 466, 631 S.W.2d 292 (1982). Moreover, the new opening language of paragraph (c) specifically states that Rule 60 does not apply to default judgments, "which may be set aside in accordance with Rule 55(c)."
Addition to Reporter’s Notes, 2000 Amendment: Subdivisions (a) and (b) of the rule have been revised in response to case law. In addition, subdivision (c) has been amended by changing the cross-reference in paragraph (1) from Rule 59(c) to Rule 59(b), and by revising paragraph (4).
As originally adopted, subdivision (a) provided that the trial court could "at any time" correct clerical mistakes and errors "arising from oversight or omission." Under subdivision (b), the trial court could "correct any error or mistake or to prevent the miscarriage of justice" by modifying or setting aside a judgment, decree or order within 90 days of its having been filed with the clerk. Despite this apparent dichotomy, the Supreme Court held that the 90-day limitation in subdivision (b) also applied to subdivision (a). See, e.g., Ross v. Southern Farm Bureau Cas. Ins. Co., 333 Ark. 227, 968 S.W.2d 622(1998); Phillips v. Jacobs, 305 Ark. 365, 807 S.W.2d 923(1991). The Supreme Court subsequently held in Lord v. Mazzanti, 335 Ark 25, 2 S.W.3d 76 (1999), that "clerical mistakes" under subdivision (a) can be corrected at any time and overruled any language to the contrary in Phillips and Ross.
This amendment is consistent with Lord v. Mazzanti, supra. As amended, subdivision (a) is a slightly modified version of former subdivision (b). It states the general rule that the court may, with prior notice to all parties, modify a judgment, decree or order within 90 days of its filing with the clerk to "correct errors or mistakes or to prevent the miscarriage of justice." Revised subdivision (b) expressly states an exception for "clerical mistakes" and errors "arising from oversight or omission," which may be corrected at any time with prior notice to all parties.
Amended paragraph (4) of subdivision (c) allows a judgment, decree or order to be modified or set aside "[f]or misrepresentation or fraud (whether heretofore denominated intrinsic or extrinsic) by an adverse party." This language, taken in part from Rule 60(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, eliminates the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic fraud, a distinction that has been described as "shadowy, uncertain, and somewhat arbitrary." Howard v. Scott, 125 S.W. 1158, 1166 (Mo. 1909); see also C. Wright & A. Miller, Federal Practice & Procedure 2861 (1995) (distinction is "very troublesome and unsound").
Under the prior rule, only extrinsic fraud was a ground for setting aside or modifying a judgment. This has resulted in unfairness. See, e.g., Ward v. McCord, 61 Ark. App. 271, 966 S.W.2d 925 (1998) (husband’s concealment of bank account from wife during negotiations leading to property settlement in divorce action was not extrinsic fraud); Office of Child Support Enforcement v. Mitchell, 61 Ark. App. 54, 964 S.W.2d 218 (1998) (mother’s failure to mention in affidavit filed in paternity case that a man other than defendant could have been the father of her child was not extrinsic fraud); Office of Child Support Enforcement v. Offutt, 61 Ark. App. 207, 966 S.W.2d 275 (1998) (conduct of attorney in preparing precedent containing findings not made by the court and mailing it to the judge with a letter requesting that he sign the order if no objection was received from opposing counsel did not constitute extrinsic fraud).
Addition to Reporter’s Notes, 2001 Amendment: The references to "trial court" in subdivisions (h) and (i) have been replaced with "circuit court." Constitutional Amendment 80 established the circuit courts as the "trial courts of original jurisdiction" in the state and abolished the separate chancery and probate courts.
Plain-English Summary
Rule 60 is Arkansas's answer to the federal 60(b) motion, though it is built on its own foundation rather than borrowed from the federal rule. Section (a) gives the trial court broad power for ninety days after a judgment is filed: on notice to the parties, the court can modify or vacate it to correct errors or mistakes or to prevent a miscarriage of justice, without needing to point to a specific listed ground. Section (b) carves out clerical mistakes and errors from oversight or omission, which the court can fix at any time, even mid-appeal with the appellate court's leave, because those errors do not change the substance of what the court decided.
Once ninety days pass, the door narrows considerably. Section (c) lists the only grounds left: newly discovered evidence found too late for a Rule 59 motion (within a one-year outer limit), relief for a defendant who was constructively summoned and never appeared, clerk's misprisions, misrepresentation or fraud by an adverse party, judgments against a person who was legally incapacitated without that condition showing in the record, a party's death before judgment, and errors an infant discovers within twelve months of turning eighteen. The 2000 amendment collapsed the old intrinsic-fraud/extrinsic-fraud divide into a single fraud ground, since courts had been drawing an increasingly artificial line between the two.
Sections (d) and (e) add a screening requirement: a defendant moving to set aside a judgment must show a valid defense, and a plaintiff must show a valid cause of action, before the court will reopen a case that already reached the trial stage. Sections (f) and (g) address the special case of constructive service -- restoring property taken under a vacated judgment, and protecting divorce decrees (apart from alimony) from being unwound this way. Section (j) lets a party seeking relief ask for an injunction to pause enforcement while the motion is pending.
Section (k) closes with two structural points worth remembering: a Rule 60 motion does not by itself pause a judgment's finality or operation, and old common-law writs -- coram nobis, coram vobis, audita querela, bills of review -- are abolished. Anyone who was never personally served, or who can show fraud on the court itself, can still bring an independent action outside this rule, which preserves an escape valve the rule's numbered grounds do not otherwise cover.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Rule 60 the Arkansas equivalent of a federal Rule 60(b) motion to vacate?
It serves the same function -- asking the court to modify or set aside its own judgment -- but Arkansas built its own rule rather than adopt the federal one, on the view that Arkansas practice already struck the right balance for keeping judgments final. Do not assume the federal 60(b) case law lines up ground for ground with Arkansas Rule 60(c).
How long do I have to ask the court to vacate a judgment in Arkansas?
For ordinary corrections or to prevent a miscarriage of justice, ninety days from when the judgment was filed with the clerk. After that, you need one of the specific grounds in section (c), several of which carry their own separate deadlines -- for example, one year from discovering newly discovered evidence, or two years for a defendant served only by publication.
Can a clerical error in a judgment be fixed after the ninety-day window closes?
Yes. Section (b) treats clerical mistakes and errors from oversight or omission as a distinct category the court can correct at any time, on notice to the parties, even after ninety days and even while an appeal is pending, with the appellate court's permission.
What counts as fraud under Rule 60(c)(4)?
Any misrepresentation or fraud by an adverse party, whether the older case law would have called it intrinsic or extrinsic. The 2000 amendment erased that distinction because it had produced unfair results, denying relief to parties whose opponents concealed assets or facts because the deception happened inside rather than outside the judicial process.
Do I have to prove I would win before a judgment gets vacated?
Often, yes. Sections (d) and (e) require a defendant to assert and make a prima facie showing of a valid defense, and a plaintiff to make a prima facie showing of a valid cause of action, before the court will set aside a judgment entered after the case stood for trial. Judgments entered before that point are not subject to this screening requirement.
What if I was never served with the lawsuit at all?
Rule 60 is not your only option. Section (k) preserves the right to bring an independent action to set aside a judgment if you were not personally served with process, or if the judgment was procured by fraud on the court -- relief that exists outside the numbered grounds and deadlines of section (c).
Are old remedies like a bill of review still available in Arkansas?
No. Section (k) abolishes writs of coram nobis, coram vobis, audita querela, and bills of review. Anything those remedies once provided is now folded into a Rule 60 motion or an independent action.
Does filing a Rule 60 motion automatically pause the judgment?
No. Section (k) states that a motion under this rule does not affect the finality of the judgment or suspend its operation on its own. A party who needs the judgment paused while the motion is pending must separately request an injunction under section (j).
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: arkansas rule 60ar civ p 6060(b) motion arkansasrelief from judgment arkansasvacate judgment arkansasset aside judgment arkansasmotion to modify judgment arkansasclerical error judgment arkansasninety day rule arkansas judgmentfraud on the court arkansasnewly discovered evidence after judgment arkansas