Brock v. Townsell
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Cite as 2009 Ark. 81
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS
No. 08-807
Opinion Delivered February 19, 2009
HERMAN BROCK,
APPELLANT,
VS.
TAB TOWNSELL, MAYOR OF THE CITY
OF CONWAY, ARKANSAS,
APPELLEE,
APPEAL FROM THE FAULKNER
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, FIRST
DIVISION
NO. CIV-2004-619,
HON. DAVID L. REYNOLDS, JUDGE
REBRIEFING ORDERED.
PER CURIAM
Appellant Herman Brock appeals from the circuit court’s order granting Appellee
Tab Townsell’s motion for summary judgment and denying his own motion for summary
judgment. Because Appellant has submitted a brief without a proper addendum in violation
of Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2(a)(8) (2008), we order rebriefing.
Rule 4-2(a)(8) provides, in pertinent part:
Following the signature and certificate of service, the appellant’s brief shall
contain an Addendum which shall include true and legible photocopies of the
order, judgment, decree, ruling, letter opinion, or Workers’ Compensation
Commission opinion from which the appeal is taken, along with any other
relevant pleadings, documents, or exhibits essential to an understanding of the
case and the Court’s jurisdiction on appeal.
Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(a)(8). The procedure to be followed when an appellant has submitted
an insufficient abstract or addendum is set forth in Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2(b)(3):
Cite as 2009 Ark. 81
Whether or not the appellee has called attention to deficiencies in the
appellant’s abstract or Addendum, the Court may address the question at any
time. If the Court finds the abstract or Addendum to be deficient such that the
Court cannot reach the merits of the case, or such as to cause an unreasonable
or unjust delay in the disposition of the appeal, the Court will notify the
appellant that he or she will be afforded an opportunity to cure any
deficiencies, and has fifteen days within which to file a substituted abstract,
Addendum, and brief, at his or her own expense, to conform to Rule 4-2(a)(5)
and (8). Mere modifications of the original brief by the appellant, as by
interlineation, will not be accepted by the Clerk. Upon the filing of such a
substituted brief by the appellant, the appellee will be afforded an opportunity
to revise or supplement the brief, at the expense of the appellant or the
appellant’s counsel, as the Court may direct. If after the opportunity to cure
the deficiencies, the appellant fails to file a complying abstract, Addendum and
brief within the prescribed time, the judgment or decree may be affirmed for
noncompliance with the Rule.
Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(b)(3).
Here, Appellant’s brief is deficient due to the fact that his addendum lacks relevant
pleadings essential to an understanding of the case. The record reveals that the case was
decided by the circuit court upon cross motions for summary judgment. However, the
addendum fails to include both motions for summary judgment, the responses and replies
thereto, and the briefs in support thereof. Appellee’s answer to Appellant’s amended and
substituted complaint also does not appear in the addendum.
Because Appellant has failed to comply with our rules, we order him to file a
substituted addendum and brief within fifteen days from the date of entry of this order. If
Appellant fails to do so within the prescribed time, the order appealed from may be affirmed
for noncompliance with Rule 4-2. After service of the substituted addendum and brief,
-2-
Cite as 2009 Ark. 81
Appellee shall have an opportunity to revise or supplement his brief in the time prescribed
by the clerk.
Rebriefing ordered.
-3-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
