Court Opinion

ID: 9692099
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 15:41:42.398587+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:19:31.256722
License: Public Domain

PAUL E. DANIELSON, Justice, concurring. I concur with the order to rebrief and to supplement the record in the instant matter. But in addition, I take this opportunity to encourage the readoption of our former rule of affirmance in such cases. Two years ago, this court alerted the bar to the problems this court was incurring due to deficient appellate briefs. See In re Appellate Practice Concerning Defective Briefs, 369 Ark. App’x 553 (2007). In that vein, we stated: With this current raft of nonconforming briefs, and the time wasted and expense incurred, this court may be forced in the near future to return to its former rule of affirmance. 369 Ark. App’x at 554. |4It is my opinion that, two years later, we have reached “the near future.” So far this term, since August 2008, we have ordered rebriefing in eleven cases, and we still have several months to go. In the prior term, we ordered rebriefing in nine cases, and, in the term before that, during which we issued our alert, eleven cases. It is clear that our deficient-brief problem is getting worse, not better. Enough is enough. CORBIN, J., joins.