ARK.] KNABE V. BALL 351 J. C. -Jimm y " KNABE ET AL V. CARROLL BALL ET AL 5-6087 485 S.W. 2d 745 Opinion delivered October 23, 1972 Appeal from Pulaski Chancery Court, Third Division, Kay. L. Matthews, Chancellor; affirmed. Art Givens, for appellants. E. H. Herrod, for appellees. PER CURIAM The decree is affirmed for failure of appellants to comply with Rule 9 of the rules of this . court. Even though appellees, after pointing out appellants' noncompliance, supplied many of . the deficiencies by supplementing the abstract of oral testimony and setting out the chancellor's findings of fact, we are , still unable to understand the testimony without any abstract of any of the 'pleadings, the court's decree, or, most important of all, 'a plat and five or six photographic exhibits without which the testimony is not understandable. See Baker v. Trotter, 252 Ark. 247, 486 S.W. 2d 7; Reliable Finance Co. v. Rhodes, 252 Ark. 1077, 483 S.W. 2d 187.
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.