From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Duelmer v. Hand

Supreme Court of Arkansas
Jul 1, 1985
692 S.W.2d 601 (Ark. 1985)

Opinion

No. 85-52

Opinion delivered July 1, 1985

APPEAL ERROR — ABSTRACTING — DISMISSAL IS REMEDY FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH ABSTRACTING RULES. — The lower court's opinion is the heart of any appeal; appellant's failure to abstract the order, judgment or decree appealed from requires dismissal. [Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 9(d) and (e).]

Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court, Second Division; Perry Whitmore, Judge; appeal dismissed.

Barron, Coleman Barket, P.A., by: Thomas L. Barron, for appellant.

Randell J. Wright and Henry C. Morris, for appellee.


Among items not abstracted, which causes us to dismiss this appeal under Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 9 (d) and (e), is the order, judgment or decree appealed from. The lower court's decision is the heart of any appeal. The abstract does not reveal that there has been any final disposition of the merits of this case. A reading of the Rule 9 opinion written for the court by Justice Byrd and reported as Bank of Ozark v. Isaacs, 263 Ark. 113, 563 S.W.2d 707 (1978) is most instructive. In addition to our own rules last published in the reports at 279 Ark. 497 (1983) and also published in volume 3 A of the Arkansas Statutes, several publishing firms offer updated rules for sale to the public.

Appeal dismissed.

GEORGE ROSE SMITH, J., not participating.


Summaries of

Duelmer v. Hand

Supreme Court of Arkansas
Jul 1, 1985
692 S.W.2d 601 (Ark. 1985)
Case details for

Duelmer v. Hand

Case Details

Full title:Louis DUELMER v. Ray HAND

Court:Supreme Court of Arkansas

Date published: Jul 1, 1985

Citations

692 S.W.2d 601 (Ark. 1985)
692 S.W.2d 601

Citing Cases

Pyle v. Robertson

See Rule 4-2(a)(6) of the Rules of Supreme Court. Pyle also significantly fails to abstract the trial court's…