TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Green v. Williford

Lonnie GREEN v. Dwala WILLIFORD

Green v. Williford, 961 S.W.2d 766 (Ark. 1998)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Arkansas · State Highest Courts
Decided
February 19, 1998
Docket
No. CA 97-1312
Citations
961 S.W.2d 766331 Ark. 5331998 Ark. LEXIS 100

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Per Curiam. Appellee Dwala Williford moves the court for dismissal of this appeal for failure of appellant Lonnie Green to state in his notice of appeal that financial arrangements have been made with the court reporter for preparation of the transcript as required by amended Arkansas Rule of Appellate Procedure — Civil 3(e). The Arkansas Court Reporters Association requests permission to file an amicus curiae brief in this matter in support of the motion to dismiss, and that motion is granted.

The relevant dates are these. On October 10, 1997, Green filed his notice of appeal without a statement that financial arrangements had been made with the court reporter. On November 3, 1997, Green filed the record in his appeal which included the trial transcript. On December 9, 1997, Green filed his appellant’s brief. On December 23, 1997, appellee Williford moved to dismiss Green’s appeal for failure to comply with Ark. R. App. P.—Civ. 3(e).

Last year, we amended Ark. R. App. P.—Civ. 3(e) to require that the notice of appeal state that financial arrangements had been made with the court reporter. That amendment took effect on March 1, 1997. On June 23, 1997, we issued a per curiam order which included an amendment to Ark. R. App. P.—Civ. 3(e) that a notice of appeal is invalid if it does not include the statement regarding financial arrangements with the court reporter. On December 4, 1997, we issued a per curiam order, which included an Addition to Reporter’s Notes that the “invalidity” language under the June 23, 1997 amendment means that substantial compliance is not the standard for saving a notice of appeal when the financial-arrangement language is omitted.

We first conclude that the fact that a notice of appeal may be invalid does not render the notice automatically void but rather voidable until actually annulled. Cf. Powers v. Bryant, 309 Ark. 568 , 832 S.W.2d 232 (1992) (defect in judgment which may render it invalid is only voidable). Next, though we have determined that the statement regarding financial arrangements with the court reporter is essential to the validity of a notice of appeal, a contest to that notice of appeal must be timely made. Here, Williford waited until after the court reporter had been paid for the transcript and after the record with the transcript had been filed in this court. Indeed, the motion to dismiss was not filed until after Green’s brief had been filed.

The fact that a notice of appeal may be invalid due to lack of a “financial-arrangements” statement will not be considered fatal to the appeal if the record, including the trial transcript, has been lodged with the Clerk in a timely manner. Prior to the appellant’s lodging of the record on appeal, a challenge to the notice of appeal may be made by filing a motion to dismiss the appeal accompanied by a partial record. Once the court reporter’s transcript has been lodged, however, the “financial-arrangements” issue is obviously moot.

The motion to dismiss is denied.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1998: 21999: 12016: 119982026peak 1998 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Dugal Logging, Inc. v. Arkansas Pulpwood Co.984 S.W.2d 410 (Ark. 1999)
  2. Quality Fixtures, Inc. v. Multi-Purpose Facilities Board970 S.W.2d 815 (Ark. 1998)
  3. Clayton v. Ideal Chemical & Supply Co.977 S.W.2d 228 (Ark. 1998)
  4. Mann v. Pierce2016 Ark. 418, 505 S.W.3d 150 · Concurrence

Most recent

  1. Mann v. Pierce2016 Ark. 418, 505 S.W.3d 150 · Concurrence
  2. Dugal Logging, Inc. v. Arkansas Pulpwood Co.984 S.W.2d 410 (Ark. 1999)
  3. Clayton v. Ideal Chemical & Supply Co.977 S.W.2d 228 (Ark. 1998)
  4. Quality Fixtures, Inc. v. Multi-Purpose Facilities Board970 S.W.2d 815 (Ark. 1998)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Powers v. Bryant, 832 S.W.2d 232 (Ark. 1992) 24

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list