Summary
The Supreme Court of Arkansas denied Mary Hickson's petition for a writ of certiorari to complete the appellate record and dismissed her appeal. The court held that the record was not timely lodged because the second extension order was entered after the first extension period expired, and timely filing of the record is jurisdictional.
Holdings
- An order extending the time to lodge the record on appeal is ineffective when it is entered after the period prescribed by the appellate rule or a prior extension order has expired.
- Timely filing of the record on appeal is a jurisdictional requirement for perfecting an appeal; failure to timely lodge the record requires dismissal.
Questions Presented
- Whether the circuit court's order granting a second extension to lodge the record was effective when entered after the prior extension had expired.
- Whether the Supreme Court of Arkansas could issue a writ of certiorari to complete the record when the record had not been timely lodged.
- Whether the untimely filing of the record required dismissal of the appeal.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (5)
- Osburn v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 341 Ark. 218, 15 S.W.3d 673 (2000)(followed)
- Rose Care, Inc. v. Jones, 355 Ark. 682, 144 S.W.3d 738 (2004) (per curiam)(followed)
- Coggins v. Coggins, 353 Ark. 431, 108 S.W.3d 588 (2003) (per curiam)(followed)
- Murphy v. Dumas, 343 Ark. 608, 36 S.W.3d 351 (2001) (per curiam)(followed)
- Seay v. Wildlife Farms, Inc., 342 Ark. 503, 29 S.W.3d 711 (2000)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…