Opinion ID: 2440997
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Arkansas Civil Rights Act of 1993

Text: Appellant's second point is that Act 181 violates the Arkansas Civil Rights Act of 1993, codified at Ark.Code Ann. § 16-123-101 to -108 (Supp.1995). However, upon our review of the abstract and record, we find no ruling on this issue. It was appellant's burden to obtain a ruling from the chancellor, and the absence of such a ruling constituted a waiver of this issue on appeal. Southern Farm Bureau Cas. Ins. v. Allen, 326 Ark. 1023, 934 S.W.2d 527 (1996). Moreover, we observe that appellant did not develop this issue below by demonstrating proof of a racial motive behind Act 181, or by offering evidence that, as a result of the Act, there was a disparate impact upon minority voters. To the contrary, in his brief, he stated that [o]ne can only speculate that in 1955 the changing patterns of racial composition within rural Arkansas may have contributed to the desire to have those in rural Jefferson County elect the municipal judge in Pine Bluff. In short, mere speculation does not equate to proof of racial motive or disparate impact. Consequently, we must affirm the decision of the chancellor. Affirmed.