ARK.] 1 CASES DETERMINED IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS Ron LOFTIN, Sr. v. CREWS & ASSOCIATES, INC. and
U.S. Associates, Inc., An Arkansas Corporation v. Crews & Associates, Inc. 89-111 771 S.W.2d 16 Supreme Court of Arkansas Opinion delivered May 22, 1989 APPEAL & ERROR - FLAGRANT DEFECT IN ABSTRACT REQUIRES AFFIRMANCE. - Where appellant did not abstract the complaints, the answers, the motions for summary judgment, the affidavits, or the order consolidating the two lawsuits and granting summary judgment, the abstract was flagrantly deficient and the case was affirmed under Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 9. Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court; Perry Whitmore, Judge; affirmed. Gary E. Johnson, for appellant. Anderson & Kilpatrick, by: Overton S. Anderson, for appellee. ROBERT H. DUDLEY, Justice. The trial court granted a summary judgment in these consolidated cases. We affirm under Rule 9(d) of the Rules of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals. [11 Appellant did not abstract the complaints, the answers, the motions for summary judgment, the affidavits, or the order consolidating the two lawsuits and granting summary judgment.
2 [299 The abstract is flagrantly deficient and, therefore, we affirm.
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.