FURNAS v. KIMBRELL, 2014 Ark. 501 (2014)
Court: Supreme Court of Arkansas
Number: inarco20141204018
Visitors: 4
Filed: Dec. 04, 2014
Latest Update: Dec. 04, 2014
Summary: PER CURIAM. Appellants have appealed from an order of the Pulaski County Circuit Court that was issued after prior orders had been appealed to the Arkansas Supreme Court and after the case was remanded pursuant to our decision in Kimbrell v. McCleskey, 2012 Ark. 443 , 424 S.W.3d 844 . However, appellants failed to include the orders or judgments from the prior appeal in their addendum. Because these missing orders and judgments are essential to an understanding of the case, we order appella
Summary: PER CURIAM. Appellants have appealed from an order of the Pulaski County Circuit Court that was issued after prior orders had been appealed to the Arkansas Supreme Court and after the case was remanded pursuant to our decision in Kimbrell v. McCleskey, 2012 Ark. 443 , 424 S.W.3d 844 . However, appellants failed to include the orders or judgments from the prior appeal in their addendum. Because these missing orders and judgments are essential to an understanding of the case, we order appellan..
More
PER CURIAM.
Appellants have appealed from an order of the Pulaski County Circuit Court that was issued after prior orders had been appealed to the Arkansas Supreme Court and after the case was remanded pursuant to our decision in Kimbrell v. McCleskey, 2012 Ark. 443, 424 S.W.3d 844. However, appellants failed to include the orders or judgments from the prior appeal in their addendum. Because these missing orders and judgments are essential to an understanding of the case, we order appellants to supplement their addendum with copies of these documents. See Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(a)(8) (2014). Appellants' omission of these items from the addendum renders appellants' brief deficient, and we order rebriefing in this case pursuant to Rule 4-2(b)(3). Therefore, in accordance with Rule 4-2(c)(2), we give appellants fifteen days to submit a conforming brief by filing a supplemental addendum. While we have noted the above-mentioned deficiency, we encourage Appellant's counsel to review Rule 4-2 in its entirety as it relates to the abstract and addendum, as well as the entire record, to ensure that no additional deficiencies are present, as any subsequent rebriefing order may result in affirmance of the order or judgment due to noncompliance with Rule 4-2. See Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(b)(3) (2011); see also Kirkland v. Sandlin, 2011 Ark. 106 (per curiam).
Rebriefing ordered.
Source: Leagle
