Legal Opinion

Forrest v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided May 28, 1985PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

With respect to this motion for a rule on the clerk, the attorney for the appellant insists that it is the court reporter’s responsibility to prepare the record and to notify the attorney if more time is needed. Counsel therefore refuses to recognize his responsibility for filing the record on time. Counsel is in error. We have repeatedly held that the attorney is responsible for filing the record and cannot shift that responsibility to the trial judge or to the court reporter. See, for example, Christopher v. Jones, 271 Ark. 911, 611 S.W. 2d 521 (1981). As stated in our per curiam order on…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Christopher v. JonesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1981

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Lewis v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1988
  2. Cook v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1997

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

Powered by the Exa API