Van Bibber v. Laster

709 S.W.2d 90, 289 Ark. 87, 1986 Ark. LEXIS 1915
CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas
DecidedMay 19, 1986
Docket85-266
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 709 S.W.2d 90 (Van Bibber v. Laster) 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
Van Bibber v. Laster, 709 S.W.2d 90, 289 Ark. 87, 1986 Ark. LEXIS 1915 (Ark. 1986).

Opinion

Darrell Hickman, Justice.

On March 15,1984, at approximately 9 p.m., appellant, Thomas H. Van Bibber, was hit by appellee’s car while he was crossing the street. Dr. Van Bibber and his wife sued the appellee for injuries he suffered as a result of the accident. A jury verdict in favor of the appellee was returned, arid the appellants appeal pro se.

We must affirm this case because the appellants have failed to abstract any of the testimony or the pleadings which are essential for us to review their case. See Rule 9, Rules of the Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals. The fact the appellants are pro se is immaterial. Bryant v. Lockhart, 288 Ark. 302, 705 S.W.2d 9 (1986).

Affirmed.

Purtle, J., not participating.

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

Related

Hooker v. Deere Credit Services, Inc.
971 S.W.2d 267 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 1998)
Garland v. Windsor Door, National Union Fire Insurance
719 S.W.2d 714 (Court of Appeals of Arkansas, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
709 S.W.2d 90, 289 Ark. 87, 1986 Ark. LEXIS 1915, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/van-bibber-v-laster-ark-1986.