Court Opinion

ID: 9759059
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 00:01:58.6284+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:28:58.683485
License: Public Domain

Jim Gunter, Justice, concurring. While I agree our rules require the majority decision, I write because it is time to overhaul Rule 5(b)(1)(C) of the Arkansas Rules of Appellate Procedure-Civil. Article 2 § 13 of the Arkansas Constitution states: Every person is entitled to a certain remedy in the laws for all injuries or wrongs he may receive in his person, property or character; he ought to obtain justice freely, and without purchase; completely, and without denial; promptly and without delay; conformably to the laws. In this case, we are requiring strict compliance with a rule when neither litigant has objected. We want an order from the Circuit Court stating that, as a minimum, the parties have had an opportunity to be heard. However, the parties have little to do with the real problem, that is, the court reporter’s time. Under our current rule, when the court reporter needs more time to finish the transcript, we interrupt the work of completing the transcript in order to have a hearing to determine whether to authorize more time for completion of the transcript. When the court reporter is unable to get it all done on time, why extend the time by requiring extra work not requested by either party? I suggest a review of our rule with a view to practicality balanced against the standard of our constitution which promises “justice freely” and “without delay.”