ARK.] VAN BIBBER V. LASTER 87 Cite as 289 Ark. 87 (1986) Thomas H. VAN BIBBER v. Sharon Gail LASTER 85-266 709 S.W.2d 90 Supreme Court of Arkansas Opinion delivered May 19, 1986 1. APPEAL & ERROR — FAILURE OF APPELLANTS TO ABSTRACT RECORD — AFFIRMANCE REQUIRED. — Where the appellants failed to abstract any of the testimony or the pleadings which are essential for the court to review their claim, the case must be affirmed. [Rule 9, Rules of the Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals.] 2. APPEAL & ERROR APPELLANTS' DUTY TO ABSTRACT RECORD — IMMATERIAL THAT APPELLANTS ARE PRO SE. — With regard to the appellants' duty to abstract the record, the fact that appellants are pro se is immaterial.
Of' 88 [289 Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court, Second Division; John B. Plegge, Special Judge; affirmed. Thomas H. Van Bibber, Sr., for appellant. Matthews & Sanders, for appellee. DARRELL HICKMAN, Justice. On March 15, 1984, at approx:- imately 9 p.m., appellant, Thomas H. Van Bibber, was hit by appellee's car while he was crossing the' street. Dr. Van Bibber and his wife sued the appellee for injuries he suffered as a , result of the accident. A jury verdict in favor of the appellee was returned, and the appellants appeal pro se. [ll, 2] We must affirm this case because the appellants have failed to abstract any of the testimony or the pleadings which are essential for us to review their case. See Rule 9, Rules of the Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals. The fact the appellants are pro se is immaterial. Bryant v. Lockhart, 288 Ark. 302, 705 S.W.2d 9 (1986). Affirmed. PURTLE, J., not participating.
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.