From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Weir v. Hill

Supreme Court of Arkansas
Apr 6, 1964
377 S.W.2d 178 (Ark. 1964)

Opinion

No. 5-3253

Opinion delivered April 6, 1964.

APPEAL AND ERROR — ABSTRACT OF RECORD EFFECT OF FAILURE TO MAKE. — Judgment of lower court affirmed under Supreme Court Rule 9 where there was no abstract of the pleadings, judgment or testimony heard below that would enable the Supreme Court to determine the facts without exploring the record.

Appeal from Washington Circuit Court, Maupin Cummings, Judge; affirmed.

Davis Mills, for appellant.

Scott Davidson, Hirsch, Cathey Brown, for appellee.


This appears to be an action brought by the appellee to recover judgment upon six promissory notes executed by the appellant. We do not reach the merits, for under Rule 9 we are compelled to affirm the judgment. The appellant has submitted only a statement of the case, a list of the points relied upon for reversal, and a brief. There is no abstract of the pleadings, the judgment, or the testimony that was heard below. To determine the facts in the case we should have to explore the record, which is contrary to our practice. Vire v. Vire, 236 Ark. 740, 368 S.W.2d 265.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Weir v. Hill

Supreme Court of Arkansas
Apr 6, 1964
377 S.W.2d 178 (Ark. 1964)
Case details for

Weir v. Hill

Case Details

Full title:WEIR v. HILL

Court:Supreme Court of Arkansas

Date published: Apr 6, 1964

Citations

377 S.W.2d 178 (Ark. 1964)
377 S.W.2d 178

Citing Cases

Reliable Finance Co. v. Rhodes

The omission violates our Rule 9(d) because an abstract of the decree in this case is "necessary to an…

Love v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co.

There is no abstract of the complaint which consists of eight pages; of the answer which consists of seven…