Court of Appeals

Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 342 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION III No. CV-13-1105 WILLIAM ROBINSON APPELLANT V. MID FIRST BANK APPELLEE RHONDA K. WOOD, Judge MidFirst Bank filed a complaint for foreclosure against William Robinson. The complaint alleged that Robinson stopped MidFirst later filed a motion for summary judgment and attached an affidavit of debt to meet its summary-judgment burden. See Hoosier v. Interinsurance E 2014 Ark. App. 120, 433 S.W.3d 259 (explaining granting summary judgment as well as our standard of review on appeal). Once the burden shifted, Rob inson failed to meet affidavit of his own or any evidence that would establish a disputed material fact. See id. After a hearing, the circuit court granted summary judgment. Robinson appeals, pro se, from that order. We affirm. F irst, pro se appellants are held to the same standard as those represented by counsel. Moon v. Holloway, 353 Ark. 520, 110 S.W.3d 250 (2003). Second, we have held Opinion Delivered May 28, 2014 APPEAL FROM THE SALINE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. CV-2010-435] HO NORABLE GRISHAM PHILLIPS, JUDGE A FFIRMED making monthly payments on his house. xch. of the Auto. Club, both the lower-court standard for proof with proof by responding with an

Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 342 that we will not consider an issue if the appellant has failed to cite to any convincing legal authority in support of his argument. Hope Sch. Dist. v. Wilson, 2011 Ark. App. 219, 382 S.W.3d 782. The failure to develop a point legally or factually is reason enough to affirm the circuit court. Walters v. Dobbins, 2010 Ark. 260, 370 S.W.3d 209. Here, Robinson’s one-page argument fails to cite any convincing legal authority. He has not developed his argument in any way; Robinson fails to specify any grounds on which we are to reverse. We therefore affirm the circuit court’s order. Affirmed. P ITTMAN and HIXSON, JJ., agree. William Robinson, pro se appellant. Wilson & Associates, PLLC, by: H. Keith Morrison and Samuel S. High, for appellee. 2