Case Title: Financial Benefit Life Insurance Company et al. v. Mark Weedman, Jr. et al.

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: arkansas

Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

Date: 1998-05-14T00:00:00Z

Document:
FINANCIAL BENEFIT LIFE INSURANCE CO., and
Billie Hendricks, as Administrator of the
Estate of Inza Weedman v. Mark WEEDMAN, Jr.,
Individually and as Administrator of the
Estate of Mark Weedman, Sr., Deceased

98-380                                             ___ S.W.2d ___

                    Supreme Court of Arkansas
                 Opinion delivered May 14, 1998


Appeal & error -- statements alleged must appear in record to be
     considered well grounded in fact -- appellant's petition for
     review not well grounded in fact -- appellee's request for
     attorney's fees granted.-- Pursuant to Ark. R. App.--Civ. 11,
     statements alleged must appear in the record for the supreme
     court to consider them to be well grounded in fact; where
     appellants' legal argument and request for the supreme court
     to depart from present case law were dependent upon statements
     of facts that could not be found in the record, the court was
     unable to say that appellants' petition for review was well
     grounded in fact as required by Rule 11; in accordance with
     Rule 11(c), the supreme court granted appellee's request for
     reasonable attorney's fees related to his work in responding
     to appellants' petition. 


     Motion for Rule 11 sanctions; granted.
     Timothy O. Dudley, for appellants.
     Robinson, Staley & Marshall, by:  Robert Robinson and
Eichenbaum, Lisles & Heister, P.A., by:  James H. Penick, for
appellee.

     Per Curiam.
     Appellants petitioned for review of the court of appeals'
unpublished decision rendered in this case on March 11, 1998.  The
decision was based in part on this court's recognition of the rule
that an objection to an irregularity or inconsistency in a verdict
must be made prior to the discharge of the jury.  In affirming the
verdict in this case, the court of appeals determined that the time
for correcting a verdict had passed because an objection to the
verdict was not raised by the appellants until the jury had already
been discharged and left the courtroom.  See P.A.M. Trans., Inc. v.
Arkansas Blue Cross & Blue Shield, 315 Ark. 234,