Van Bibber v. Laster

709 S.W.2d 90, 289 Ark. 87, 1986 Ark. LEXIS 1915
Supreme Court of Arkansas·Decided May 19, 1986·No. 85-266·Published·Cited by 2 cases

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

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

709 S.W.2d 90 (Van Bibber v. Laster) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

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)