Legal Opinion

Knabe v. Ball

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided October 23, 1972No. 5-6087PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

The decree is affirmed for failure of appellants to comply with Rule 9 of the rules of this court. Even though appellees, after pointing out appellants’ noncompliance, supplied many of the deficiencies by supplementing the abstract of oral testimony and setting out the chancellor’s findings of fact, we are still unable to understand the testimony without any abstract of any of the pleadings, the court’s decree, or, most important of all, a plat and five or six photographic exhibits without which the testimony is not understandable. See Baker v. Trotter, 252 Ark. 247, 486 S.W. 2d 7; Reliable…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Reliable Finance Co. v. RhodesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1972
  2. Baker v. TrotterSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1972

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Burgess v. BurgessSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1985

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

Powered by the Exa API