City of Little Rock v. AT&T Communications of Southwest, Inc.

Supreme Court of Arkansas

City of Little Rock v. AT&T Communications of Southwest, Inc.

870 S.W.2d 217, 316 Ark. 94, 1994 Ark. LEXIS 110

CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas

DecidedFebruary 21, 1994

Docket93-1251

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 870 S.W.2d 217 (City of Little Rock v. AT&T Communications of Southwest, 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

City of Little Rock v. AT&T Communications of Southwest, Inc., 870 S.W.2d 217, 316 Ark. 94, 1994 Ark. LEXIS 110 (Ark. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The City of Fort Smith and the Arkansas Municipal League have filed motions for permission to file amicus curiae briefs supporting appellants’ side of this case. Appellee American Telephone and Telegraph Communications of the Southwest, Inc. has responded and asked for additional pages of argument to respond to the amicus curiae briefs. We grant permission to file the amicus curiae briefs and also grant appellee an additional ten pages of argument to respond.

In its motion, appellee states that it needs the extra pages to respond to new issues raised in the amicus curiae briefs. In order to prevent any possible misunderstanding, we state that we do not know if the new issues were raised by the pleadings and ruled on by the trial court, but we ordinarily address amicus curiae arguments similar to the way we address arguments by intervenors, and intervenors on appeal cannot enlarge the issues beyond those raised by the pleadings of the parties in the lower court. Weber v. Pryor, 259 Ark. 153, 531 S.W.2d 708 (1976).

Newbern, J., not participating.

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

Per Curiam.

The City of Fort Smith and the Arkansas Municipal League have filed motions for permission to file amicus curiae briefs supporting appellants’ side of this case. Appellee American Telephone and Telegraph Communications of the Southwest, Inc. has responded and asked for additional pages of argument to respond to the amicus curiae briefs. We grant permission to file the amicus curiae briefs and also grant appellee an additional ten pages of argument to respond.

In its motion, appellee states that it needs the extra pages to respond to new issues raised in the amicus curiae briefs. In order to prevent any possible misunderstanding, we state that we do not know if the new issues were raised by the pleadings and ruled on by the trial court, but we ordinarily address amicus curiae arguments similar to the way we address arguments by intervenors, and intervenors on appeal cannot enlarge the issues beyond those raised by the pleadings of the parties in the lower court. Weber v. Pryor, 259 Ark. 153, 531 S.W.2d 708 (1976).

Newbern, J., not participating.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

870 S.W.2d 217, 316 Ark. 94, 1994 Ark. LEXIS 110, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-little-rock-v-att-communications-of-southwest-inc-ark-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack