From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dixon Ticonderoga Co. v. Winburn Tile Manufacturing Co.

Supreme Court of Arkansas
Dec 18, 1995
911 S.W.2d 955 (Ark. 1995)

Opinion

95-812

Opinion delivered December 18, 1995

1. APPEAL ERROR — MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT APPELLANT'S ABSTRACT GRANTED — CASE WAS NOT READY FOR SUBMISSION. — Because the case was not yet ready for submission, the supreme court granted appellant's motion to supplement its abstract, allowing appellant fifteen days within which to file a substituted abstract and brief. 2. APPEAL ERROR — APPELLANT'S ATTORNEY MAY BE ALLOWED TO REVISE BRIEF WHERE NO UNREASONABLE OR UNJUST DELAY IN DISPOSITION OF APPEAL IS CAUSED. — Rule 4-2(b)(2) of the Rules of the Supreme Court provides that, when it does not cause an unreasonable or unjust delay in the disposition of an appeal, an appellant's attorney may be allowed time to revise his brief, at his own expense, to conform to Rule 4-2(a)(6); however, he may not simply address the new issue in his reply brief, as the rule requires that appellee be afforded the opportunity to revise or supplement its brief; the supreme court concluded that granting the motion in the present case would not cause an unjust delay because the case was not yet ready for submission and other cases were ready for submission; appellee was afforded an opportunity to revise or supplement its brief, upon appellant's filing of the substituted and brief, at the expense of appellant's counsel.

Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court; John B. Plegge, Judge; Motion to Supplement Appellant's Abstract; granted.

Allen Law Firm, by: H. William Allen, for appellant.

John E. Tull, III, for appellee.


The appellant, Dixon Ticonderoga Co., filed its abstract and brief in this case. The Winburn Tile Manufacturing Co. filed the appellee's brief. Prior to the time appellant's reply brief was due, the appellant's attorney realized that the abstract was insufficient to address an issue raised by appellee in its brief, and filed a motion asking that he be allowed to supplement appellant's abstract. Since the case is not yet ready for submission, we grant the motion and allow the appellant fifteen days within which to file a substituted abstract and brief.

Rule 4-2(b)(2) of the Rules of the Supreme Court provides that, when it does not cause an unreasonable or unjust delay in the disposition of an appeal, an appellant's attorney may be allowed time to revise his brief, at his own expense, to conform to Rule 4-2(a)(6); however, he may not simply address the new issue in his reply brief, as the rule requires that appellee be afforded the opportunity to revise or supplement its brief. Granting the motion in this case will not cause an unjust delay since the case is not yet ready for submission and other cases are ready for submission. Upon filing of the substituted abstract and brief, the appellee will be afforded an opportunity to revise or supplement its brief, at the expense of the appellant's counsel.


Summaries of

Dixon Ticonderoga Co. v. Winburn Tile Manufacturing Co.

Supreme Court of Arkansas
Dec 18, 1995
911 S.W.2d 955 (Ark. 1995)
Case details for

Dixon Ticonderoga Co. v. Winburn Tile Manufacturing Co.

Case Details

Full title:DIXON TICONDEROGA COMPANY v . WINBURN TILE MANUFACTURING COMPANY

Court:Supreme Court of Arkansas

Date published: Dec 18, 1995

Citations

911 S.W.2d 955 (Ark. 1995)
911 S.W.2d 955

Citing Cases

Moncrief v. State

Granting the motion in this case will not cause an unjust delay since the case is not yet ready for…

McPeek v. White River Lodge Enters

This court routinely grants motions to supplement abstracts before the case is submitted with any costs…