Thompson v. Erwin

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Thompson v. Erwin

832 S.W.2d 854, 310 Ark. 213, 1992 Ark. LEXIS 468

CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas

DecidedJuly 6, 1992

Docket92-513

StatusPublished

This text of 832 S.W.2d 854 (Thompson v. Erwin) 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

Thompson v. Erwin, 832 S.W.2d 854, 310 Ark. 213, 1992 Ark. LEXIS 468 (Ark. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

.

Per Curiam.

Petitioner moves for an abbreviated briefing schedule. Because this is a mandamus action, we already have expedited this matter. On May 1, 1992, petitioner filed this original action, and the state filed its response ten days later. The record required supplementation which was granted on June 8, 1992. Petitioner filed her brief on June 22, 1992, and the state’s brief is due on July 22, 1992. Petitioner’s reply brief, if any, will be due on or before August 6, 1992. Petitioner’s motion to expedite was not filed until June 25, 1992, and at this stage of the briefing schedule, it is impossible to accelerate this matter more than it already has been. Submission of the case also will be advanced.

The state in its response to the mandamus petition herein states an interlocutory appeal in the case of Joseph Wicker v. State, No. 92-245, is also pending and describes how that matter might be relevant to this action. Accordingly, we will also expedite the Wicker case, so both cases are to be submitted at the same time.

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

.

Per Curiam.

Petitioner moves for an abbreviated briefing schedule. Because this is a mandamus action, we already have expedited this matter. On May 1, 1992, petitioner filed this original action, and the state filed its response ten days later. The record required supplementation which was granted on June 8, 1992. Petitioner filed her brief on June 22, 1992, and the state’s brief is due on July 22, 1992. Petitioner’s reply brief, if any, will be due on or before August 6, 1992. Petitioner’s motion to expedite was not filed until June 25, 1992, and at this stage of the briefing schedule, it is impossible to accelerate this matter more than it already has been. Submission of the case also will be advanced.

The state in its response to the mandamus petition herein states an interlocutory appeal in the case of Joseph Wicker v. State, No. 92-245, is also pending and describes how that matter might be relevant to this action. Accordingly, we will also expedite the Wicker case, so both cases are to be submitted at the same time.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

832 S.W.2d 854, 310 Ark. 213, 1992 Ark. LEXIS 468, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thompson-v-erwin-ark-1992.