Legal Opinion · Dissent

Hartford Insurance Co. v. Brewer

Court of Appeals of Arkansas

Decided May 29, 1996No. CA 95-237Published

1DissentWendell L. Griffen, Judge

“A blind man should not judge of colors.” Proverb

The majority would affirm this patendy wrong result due to an abstracting error. The Arkansas Supreme Court has repeatedly held that even an abstract that falls considerably short of the requirements of Rule 4-2 may not be “flagrantly” deficient. Linder v. Howard, 296 Ark. 414, 757 S.W.2d 549 (1988); Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(b)(2); see also Haynes v. State, 309 Ark. 583, 832 S.W.2d 479 (1992); Goodloe v. Goodloe, 253 Ark. 550, 487 S.W.2d 593 (1972). The balance of the parties’ briefs may overcome the deficiency and provide the court with the…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Walker v. StephensCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1982
  2. Rowland v. Gastroenterology Associates, P.A.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1983
  3. LINDER BY AND THROUGH LINDER v. HowardSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1988
  4. Martin v. HaleTennessee Supreme Court · 1934
  5. Fight v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1993

8 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