Mann v. Pierce
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partRhonda K. Wood, Justice
The majority begins a discussion of the merits of the appeal stating, “We must first address the notice of appeal.” This statement is an error. “[Ajbsent an issue of subject-matter jurisdiction, an appellate court will not raise an issue unless argued by the parties on appeal.” Edwards v. Edwards, 2009 Ark. 580, at *8, 357 S.W.3d 445, 450. Accordingly, I concur in the majority opinion as to the merits of the case but dissent from the majority’s discu'ssion on the sufficiency of the notice of appeal.
[1SI believe it was an error for the court to address the sufficiency of the notice of appeal…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Kontrick v. RyanSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- J.W. Reynolds Lumber Co. v. Smackover State BankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1992
- Summerville v. ThrowerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2007
- Edwards v. EdwardsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2009
- Nance v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2014
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.