Aings v. Gibson

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Aings v. Gibson

613 S.W.2d 87, 272 Ark. 60, 1981 Ark. LEXIS 1201

CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas

DecidedFebruary 23, 1981

Docket80-269

StatusPublished

This text of 613 S.W.2d 87 (Aings v. Gibson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Aings v. Gibson, 613 S.W.2d 87, 272 Ark. 60, 1981 Ark. LEXIS 1201 (Ark. 1981).

Pincite

Opinions

Per Curiam.

Our Rule 9 (b) provides that a statement of the case should be made at the beginning of the abstract. The statement should ordinarily not be more than two pages in length.

Our Rule 9 (d) provides that appellant’s abstract of the record should consist of an impartial condensation of such material parts of the record as are necessary to an understanding of all questions presented to this court for decision.

In the present case the statement was seven pages in length. The appeal was from an order of the trial court refusing to grant a new trial. The order or judgment was not abstracted nor were any of the pleadings. Therefore, we must affirm the judgment of the trial court for the reason that appellant has failed to comply with Rule 9-

Affirmed.

John I. Purtle, Justice, dissenting on denial of rehearing.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI