Cite as 2017 Ark. App. 654 

## ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION II No. CV

- 17

- 403

ABSOLUTE CARE MANAGE MENT AND GUARANTEE INSURA NCE COMPANY APPELLANT S
V.
LETHA STACY AND DEAT H & PERMANENT TOTAL DISABILITY TRUST FUND APPELLEE S Opinion Delivered: November 29, 2017

APPEAL FROM THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATIO N COMMISSION [ NO. G507218 ]

REBRIEFING ORDERED

WAYMOND M. BROWN , Judge Absolute Care Management and its insurer, Guarantee Insurance Company, appeal the decision of the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission (Commission) finding that appellee Letha Stacy was performing employment services when she was injured in a

one
- vehicle wreck. We do not reach the m erits of appellants’ argument due to deficiencies in the abstract, brief, and addendum. Therefore, we order rebriefing. Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4

- 2(a)(5 ) 1 provides that all material information provided in a transcript must be abstracted and that no m ore than one page of transcript shall be abstracted without giving a record page reference. Here, although appellants have abstracted testimony found on pages 77, 78, 103, and 105 of the record, they have failed to

1 (2016).Cite as 2017 Ark. App. 654

2 give the record page reference s . Additi onally, appellants have given the wrong record page s for testimony found on page three of the abstract. 2 Appellants correctly abstracted the deposition testimony of Katharine Joplin, but they failed to give record page references. Instead, they included a copy of the transcript of the deposition in the addendum and cited to the addendum, which is also a violation of our rules. Transcripts, including depositions,
should not be in the addendum. 3
Rule 4

- 2(a)(6) requires a concise statement of the case without argument. It also mandates that the statement of the case include supporting page references to the abstract or addendum or both. Here, appellants’ statement of the case is replete with argument , which is impermissible under our rules. The statemen t of the case provided by appellants does not sufficiently include supporting page references to the abstract and/or addendum.
Rule 4

- 2(a)(7) provides that reference in the argument portion of the briefs to
material found in the abstract and addendum sha ll be followed by a reference to the page number of the abstract or addendum at which such material may be found. Appellants have failed to give reference page numbers throughout the argument to material found in the
abstract and/or addendum. Finally, a ppellants have not followed Rule 4

- 2(a)(8), which requires the addendum to include documents in the record on appeal that are essential for our court to confirm its

2 Appellants have given record page reference s of 21 and 22 when the correct pag es are 62 and 63 of the record. We also note that the record pages are out of order, and there is a coffee ring on page 62 of the record.

3 S ee Erwin v. Frost , 2013 Ark. App. 440.Cite as 2017 Ark. App. 654

3 jurisdiction, to understand the case, and to decide the issues on appeal. The parties were ordered by the administrative law judge (ALJ) to submit post

- hearing briefs, which they did. However, appellants have failed to include these briefs in the addendum. Due to these deficiencies, we order rebriefing and direct appellants to file a
substit uted abstract, brief, and addendum that complies with our rules. 4 The substituted abstract, brief, and addendum shall be due fifteen days from the date of this order. 5 The
deficiencies listed are not exhaustive , and appellants’ counsel should carefully r eview the rules to ensure that no other deficiencies are present. Failure to file a complying abstract, brief, and addendum within the prescribed time may result in affirmance for noncompliance. 6 Rebriefing ordered.
A BRAMSON and M URPHY , JJ., agree. Jason M. Ryburn , for appellants. One brief only.

4 Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4- 2(b)(3).

5 Id

.
6 Id

.