Chrysler Credit Corp. v. Scanlon

I do not agree with the majority that the appellant’s abstract is so deficient as to require affirmance on that basis. The items which the majority has identified as missing from the abstract are irrelevant to the understanding and resolution of the issue presented by the appeal. We have consistently held that the abstract should have only what is necessary for us to decide the issues presented. Montgomery v. Butler, 309 Ark.491, 834 S.W.2d 148(1992).

We have also held that when a necessary item is not in the abstract, we can get the information from other portions of the abstract, such as…