In re UPDATE ON THE STATUS OF THE ELECTRONIC-APPEAL PILOT PROJECT (Per Curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Cite as 2020 Ark. 248 SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS IN RE UPDATE ON THE STATUS OF THE ELECTRONIC-APPEAL PILOT PROJECT Opinion Delivered June 11, 2020 PER CURIAM On June 6, 2019, we proposed amendments to court rules that, among other things, authorized the filing of electronic-appeal records and eliminated the abstract and addendum requirements for appellate briefs. See In re Acceptance of Records on Appeal in Electronic Format & Elimination of the Abstract & Addendum Requirements, 2019 Ark. 213. At that time, we also authorized parties to proceed under the proposed rules as a pilot project to test the feasibility of the proposed amendments. To date, there have been 121 electronic appeals filed in this court and the court of appeals. However, many of those cases are still undergoing briefing. And electronic appeals, like conventional appeals, are submitted according to the rules of case priority once they have been fully briefed. Thus far, only two appeals have been fully briefed and submitted to this court for a decision, and only five have been fully briefed and submitted to the court of appeals. As more electronic appeals proceed through the appellate courts to final resolution this fall and winter, we will be able to assess the impact of, and take final action on, the proposed amendments. In the meantime, we thank everyone who has taken part in the pilot project, including parties, attorneys, circuit court clerks and staff, court reporters, and appellate court staff. We encourage anyone who has not participated to do so, and we encourage those who have participated to share their comments on the experience. Comments should be submitted in writing to Stacey Pectol, Clerk of the Arkansas Supreme Court and Arkansas Court of Appeals, 625 Marshall Street, Suite 130, Little Rock, Arkansas, 72201, or via email at eROAcomments@arcourts.gov.
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.
