Alpha Controls Engineering, Inc. v. Flagmaster, Inc.

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Alpha Controls Engineering, Inc. v. Flagmaster, Inc.

514 S.W.2d 223, 257 Ark. 75, 1974 Ark. LEXIS 1313

CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas

DecidedOctober 7, 1974

Docket74-103

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 514 S.W.2d 223 (Alpha Controls Engineering, Inc. v. Flagmaster, Inc.) 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

Alpha Controls Engineering, Inc. v. Flagmaster, Inc., 514 S.W.2d 223, 257 Ark. 75, 1974 Ark. LEXIS 1313 (Ark. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Lyle Brown, Justice.

Our Supreme Court Rule 9 (d) provides, among other things, that the appellants provide an abstract of the record as is necessary to an understanding of all questions presented to us for decision. The Rules of the Supreme Court are to be found in Ark. Stat. Ann., Vol. 3A, 1962 Replacement, beginning at page 102 of the 1973 pocket supplement.

This case is affirmed for failure to comply with the recited portion of Rule 9 (d). The trial court entered a detailed judgment consisting of four pages. The judgment sets out many specific findings of facts and conclusions of law covering the numerous facets of the case. (The case was tried to the court without a jury.) Appellant’s abstract of the judgment consists of ten lines which actually is an abstract only of the last paragraph of the court’s judgment. An abstract of all the specific findings of the court is necessary to an understanding of the issues to be decided.

We do not consider our action unduly harsh because a majority of the court would have affirmed on the merits had they been reached.

Affirmed.

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

Lyle Brown, Justice.

Our Supreme Court Rule 9 (d) provides, among other things, that the appellants provide an abstract of the record as is necessary to an understanding of all questions presented to us for decision. The Rules of the Supreme Court are to be found in Ark. Stat. Ann., Vol. 3A, 1962 Replacement, beginning at page 102 of the 1973 pocket supplement.

This case is affirmed for failure to comply with the recited portion of Rule 9 (d). The trial court entered a detailed judgment consisting of four pages. The judgment sets out many specific findings of facts and conclusions of law covering the numerous facets of the case. (The case was tried to the court without a jury.) Appellant’s abstract of the judgment consists of ten lines which actually is an abstract only of the last paragraph of the court’s judgment. An abstract of all the specific findings of the court is necessary to an understanding of the issues to be decided.

We do not consider our action unduly harsh because a majority of the court would have affirmed on the merits had they been reached.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

514 S.W.2d 223, 257 Ark. 75, 1974 Ark. LEXIS 1313, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alpha-controls-engineering-inc-v-flagmaster-inc-ark-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack