Cite as 2011 Ark. App. 212 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION I No. CA 10-945 Opinion Delivered March 16, 2011 BARRY J. JEWELL APPEAL FROM THE PULASKI COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, APPELLANT SEVENTEENTH DIVISION [NO. DR-94-6892] V. HONORABLE MACKIE M. PIERCE, JUDGE DEBRA DUREE-JEWELL APPELLEE REBRIEFING ORDERED ROBIN F. WYNNE, Judge Pro se appellant Barry Jewell appeals from the circuit court’s denial of his motion to modify child-support payments. Because Mr. Jewell has submitted a brief without a proper addendum, we order rebriefing. Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2(a)(8) (2010) requires an appellant to submit a brief including an addendum that contains “true and legible copies of the non-transcript documents in the record on appeal that are essential for the appellate court to confirm its jurisdiction, to understand the case, and to decide the issues on appeal.” When an appellant submits an insufficient addendum such that the court cannot reach the merits of the case, the appellate court will notify the appellant that he or she will be afforded fifteen days in which to cure the deficiencies and file a substituted abstract, brief, and addendum at his or her own expense. Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(b)(3) (2010).
Cite as 2011 Ark. App. 212 Here, Mr. Jewell’s brief is insufficient in that the addendum does not include a copy of the child-support order he is seeking to modify. Although he includes his motion to modify support payments and the order denying his motion, we cannot fully understand the case and decide the issues Mr. Jewell presents without the order from which his motion stems. Our supreme court has held that it is impossible for the appellate court to make an informed decision on the merits of a case without the essential documents on which the circuit court based its decision. Bryan v. City of Cotter, 2009 Ark. 172, at 4, 303 S.W.3d 64, 66–67. An order of a circuit court cannot be reviewed for error when the addendum fails to include such documents. Id. at 5, 303 S.W.3d at 66–67. Furthermore, we hold pro se appellants to the same standards as attorneys when preparing their briefs. 1 Kennedy v. Byers, 368 Ark. 516, 518, 247 S.W.3d 525, 526 (2007). Thus, the fact that Mr. Jewell is not represented by licensed counsel does not excuse his violation of our briefing rules. Because Mr. Jewell has failed to comply with Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2, we order him to file a substituted addendum and brief within fifteen days from the date of entry of our order. If he fails to do so within that time, the circuit court’s order denying child-support modification may be affirmed. Ms. Duree-Jewell is allowed fifteen days from the date Mr. Jewell files his substituted addendum and brief in which to respond, if she so chooses. 1 Although he has surrendered his law license in lieu of disbarment, see In re Barry Joseph Jewell, 2011 Ark. 73, Mr. Jewell is a trained and experienced attorney and should be well aware of the requirements of appellate briefing. -2-
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.