The opinion
Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 339
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION I
No.CV-13-746
Opinion Delivered May 28, 2014
RISIE RENE HOWARD ET AL. APPEAL FROM THE JEFFERSON
APPELLANTS COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
[No. CV-2013-90-2]
V.
HONORABLE ROBERT H. WYATT,
C & L USED CAR LOT and CITY OF JR., JUDGE
PINE BLUFF
APPELLEES AFFIRMED
LARRY D. VAUGHT, Judge
This is the second one-brief appeal filed by pro se appellant Risie Howard (joined by
other Pine Bluff, Arkansas, residents), appealing an order of the Jefferson County Circuit Court
dismissing (with prejudice) her request for a permanent injunction against appellee C & L Used
Car Lot and the City of Pine Bluff. We returned the first appeal for rebriefing pursuant to Ark.
Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(b)(3), which was modified by In re Modification of the Abstracting System, 345 Ark.
App’x 626 (2001) (requiring us to first allow rebriefing before summarily affirming).
In Howard v. C & L Used Car Lot, 2014 Ark. App. 109, we afforded Howard an
opportunity to cure the deficiencies in her first brief and gave her fifteen days to file a
substituted abstract, addendum, and brief at her own expense, which would conform to the
requirements of Rule 4-2(a)(5) and (8). However, we once again find Howard’s abstract and
addendum to be deficient such that we cannot reach the merits of the case. Specifically, she has
failed to reference essential proceedings and testimony in either the abstract or the addendum
Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 339
of the brief she filed with our court. Howard failed to abstract several pages of the court’s
questioning of an essential witness. Because these essential components of the record are not
included in Howard’s second attempt at appeal in either the abstract or the addendum, despite
being specifically directed to the deficiencies in our prior opinion, we affirm the lower court’s
ruling for noncompliance with Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2 (2013), which specifically permits that “[i]f
after the opportunity to cure the deficiencies, the appellant fails to file a complying abstract,
addendum and brief within the prescribed time, the judgment or decree may be affirmed for
noncompliance with the rule.”
Affirmed.
GLADWIN, C.J., and BROWN, J., agree.
George Howard, Jr. Legal Center, by: Risie Howard, for appellant.
No response.
2