Legal Opinion · Dissent

Poole v. Poole

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided May 1, 1989No. RC 89-2Published

1DissentTom Glaze, Justice

The appellant’s failure to file a timely transcript in this matter is due to confusion that resulted from language this court used in Pentron Corp. v. Delta Steel & Constr. Co., 286 Ark. 91, 689 S.W.2d 539 (1985). For that reason, I would grant appellant’s request to lodge his transcript.

Appellant appeals from a judgment which was entered on April 18,1988. After the trial court, on May 24,1988, denied his motion for a new trial, appellant filed a timely notice of appeal on June 3, 1988. The trial court granted the appellant a full seven months extension from the date of the notice of appeal —…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Pentron Corp. v. Delta Steel & Construction Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1985
  2. Sherrell v. ByramSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1977

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

Powered by the Exa API