Owens v. May

Edward M. OWENS v. Robert D. MAY, Jr., Janice
Kimberly May, Louis G. Peralta, and Janice A.
Peralta

96-720                                             ___ S.W.2d ___

                    Supreme Court of Arkansas
               Opinion delivered September 9, 1996


1.   Appeal & error -- motion for reconsideration and clarification
     denied. -- Where appellant's earlier petition for writ of
     certiorari requesting the supreme court to order the circuit
     court reporter to complete the appeal record by lodging the
     sealed records and transcripts had been denied because
     appellant neither alleged omissions of error in the record nor
     alleged that the sealed transcripts would not be timely filed,
     the supreme court denied appellant's motion for
     reconsideration and clarification of the earlier denial of his
     petition for writ of certiorari, noting that the transcripts
     were timely filed prior to the court's earlier decision
     denying appellant's petition for writ of certiorari.

2.   Appeal & error -- supreme court did not decide whether sealed
     transcripts should be opened. -- No ruling appeared in the
     record denying appellant's right to open evidence sealed
     during a custody proceeding, and the supreme court, by denying
     appellant's petition for writ of certiorari, did not decide
     whether the sealed transcripts lodged by the chancellor and
     court reporter should be opened.


     Motion for Reconsideration and Clarification of Petition for
Writ of Certiorari for Completion of the Record; denied.
     Jeff Rosenzweig, for appellant.
     Joe Perry, for appellee Robert D. May, Jr.
     Charles Allen and Frank J. Wills, III, for appellee Janice
Kimberly May.
     Charles Banks, for appellees Louis G. Peralta and Janice A.
Peralta.

     Per Curiam.
     On June 21, 1996, Edward M. Owens filed a petition for writ of
certiorari, requesting this court to order the court reporter to
complete the appeal record herein by lodging the sealed records and
transcripts so as to provide (i) a clerical basis to receive the
part of the record sealed below and (ii) a schedule for the court
reporters to complete their transcripts.  Those sealed transcripts
were received by the supreme court clerk on June 24, 1996.  This
court denied Owens's petition on July 8, 1996, without comment.  
     On July 9, 1996, Owens moved for reconsideration and
clarification of this court's denial of his petition for writ of
certiorari which we now deny; at the same time, we add that the
court's denial on July 8 was entered because Owens never alleged
any omissions or errors in the record, nor did he allege the sealed
transcripts would not be timely filed.  In fact, those transcripts
were timely filed prior to this court's decision on July 8, 1996,
denying Owens's petition for writ of certiorari.
     This court points out that its ruling is limited to the issue
ruled upon by the chancellor, which appears to be the chancellor's
denial of Owens's request to intervene.  No ruling appears in the
record denying Owens's right to open evidence sealed during the
custody proceeding.  In sum, this court, by denying Owens's
petition for writ of certiorari, does not decide whether the sealed
transcripts lodged by the chancellor and court reporter should be
opened.  See Cupples Farms Partnership v. Forrest City Prod. Credit
Ass'n, 310 Ark. 597, 839 S.W.2d 187 (1992); Cf. Stephens v.
Stephens, 306 Ark. 59, 810 S.W.2d 946 (1991).