Glen Bashaw, Harold Goffin, Sr., and Monticello Social Club, Inc. v. State of ArkansasAnnotate this Case
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
May 25, 2005
GLEN BASHAW, HAROLD GOFFIN, AN APPEAL FROM DREW COUNTY
SR., and MONTICELLO SOCIAL CIRCUIT COURT
CLUB, INC. [NO. CIV2003-99-5]
v. HONORABLE JERRY MAZZANTI,
STATE OF ARKANSAS
APPELLEE REBRIEFING ORDERED
This is an appeal from an order declaring the Monticello Social Club to be a public nuisance and enjoining its operation in certain respects. Appellant Harold Goffin, Sr., operates the club, and appellant Glen Bashaw owns the premises on which the club is located. They contend that the trial court erred in finding that the club was a public nuisance and that equity should not have intervened where administrative and criminal enforcement provided adequate legal remedies. They also make a brief argument regarding the admissibility of certain police reports.
Numerous exhibits were entered into evidence at trial, including: 1) an order of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Division citing the club for alcohol-sales and gambling violations; 2) approximately fifty-five police reports of crimes that occurred at or near the club; 3) various documents associated with appellant Goffin's gambling arrest; 4) a mistrial order in Goffin's criminal case. These exhibits are central to both the State's argument that the crimes and administrative violations rendered the club a public nuisance and to appellants' argument that the administrative and criminal laws were sufficient to address such problems. However, none of the trial exhibits are contained in appellants' addendum.
Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2(a)(8) (2004) provides that an appellant's addendum shall contain, inter alia, all relevant pleadings, documents, or exhibits essential to an understanding of the case. Even though appellants have abstracted witness testimony describing some of the exhibits in this case, we believe that it is necessary for us to view copies of the exhibits themselves in order to address the merits of the parties' arguments and make an informed decision in this matter. We therefore order rebriefing pursuant to Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2(b)(3) (2004). Appellants have fifteen days from the date of this order to file a substituted brief in which the trial exhibits are contained in the addendum. If appellants fail to file a complying brief within the prescribed time, the trial court's judgment may be affirmed for noncompliance with the Rule. Id. Upon the filing of appellants' substituted brief, the State may, if it wishes, file a responsive brief within the time prescribed by the supreme court clerk or it may rely on the brief it has already filed. See Branscumb v. Freeman, ___ Ark. ___, ___ S.W.3d __ (June 10, 2004).