Emma J. Ness v. Kenneth and Ruthi McNinch

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

JOSEPHINE LINKER HART, JUDGE

DIVISION III

EMMA J. NESS

APPELLANT

V.

KENNETH and RUTHI McNINCH

APPELLEES

CA00-546

February 28, 2001

APPEAL FROM THE FAULKNER COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT

[NO. CIV94-83]

HONORABLE KAREN R. BAKER

CIRCUIT JUDGE

AFFIRMED

Appellant, Emma J. Ness, sought recovery of damages from appellees, Kenneth and Ruthi McNinch, to compensate her for injuries she suffered from an attack by a deer owned by appellees. The jury found in favor of appellees and granted them $2,000 on their counterclaim for damages, which was subsequently reduced by the trial court to $100. On appeal, appellant argues that the trial court erred in denying her motion in limine to exclude testimony regarding her comparative fault and in giving the jury an instruction on comparative fault. She further argues that the trial court erred in giving the jury an instruction defining the terms "trespasser" and "licensee."

We are unable to address these issues due to deficiencies in appellant's abstract. In preparing her abstract, appellant failed to abstract her objections, the arguments of counsel, and the court's rulings on appellant's objections. Moreover, she failed to abstract the juryinstructions. Because appellant failed to provide us with an abstract of her objections and the

court's rulings, we are unable to review her arguments, and therefore we must affirm. See Newton v. Chambliss, 316 Ark. 334, 871 S.W.2d 587 (1994). While some of the material that should have been abstracted is set out in the argument portion of appellant's brief, the record on appeal is confined to that which is abstracted, and we will not consider matters contained in the argument portion of the brief as a substitute. See Thompson v. American Drug Stores, Inc., 326 Ark. 536, 932 S.W.2d 333 (1996).

Affirmed.

Jennings and Crabtree, JJ., agree.