Legal Opinion · Dissent

Francis v. Protective Life Insurance

Court of Appeals of Arkansas

Decided February 14, 2007No. CA 06-241Published

1DissentJohn Mauzy Pittman, Chief Judge

A timely notice of appeal is a jurisdictional requirement. See Stacks v. Marks, 354 Ark. 594, 127 S.W.3d 483 (2003). Because I do not believe that this court has jurisdiction, I respectfully dissent from the majority’s opinion holding otherwise.

The majority holds that the judgment filed by facsimile on November 3 was ineffectual because no “hard copy” of the judgment was ever filed. That cannot be the law. Although it is true that Administrative Order No. 2 uses the term “shall,” it does not specifically provide any sanction for failure to file the “hard copy.” The reporter’s notes to the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Luckes v. LuckesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1978
  2. Stacks v. MarksSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2003
  3. Holt Bonding Co., Inc. v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2003
  4. Southern Farm Bureau Cas. Ins. v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1964
  5. Kindiger v. HuffmanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1991

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API