Cite as 2013 Ark. App. 594
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION II
No. CV-13-137
JACK JONES Opinion Delivered October 23, 2013
APPELLANT
APPEAL FROM THE JEFFERSON
V. COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
[NO. CV-11-130-2]
CHARLES McLEMORE and HONORABLE MARION ANDREW
ROGER McLEMORE HUMPHREY, JUDGE
APPELLEES
REBRIEFING ORDERED
DAVID M. GLOVER, Judge
Jack Jones appeals from the trial court’s October 24, 2012 grant of summary judgment
in favor of Charles McLemore and Roger McLemore. As his two basic points of appeal,
Jones contends that 1) the trial court erred in granting the motion for summary judgment
regarding his claims of malicious prosecution and conspiracy to commit malicious
prosecution, and 2) the trial court erred in ruling that his claims under the Arkansas Civil
Rights Act were barred by the statute of limitations. We cannot address the merits of this
appeal because the answer to the complaint has not been included in the addendum, and
deposition testimony relied upon by Jones in making his arguments has not been abstracted.
Rule 4-2 of the Rules of the Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals sets forth
the prescribed contents for briefs filed in our appellate courts. Rule 4-2(a)(8) explains that
an appellant’s brief must contain an addendum and that the addendum must include the
Cite as 2013 Ark. App. 594
pleadings on which the trial court decided each issue. Rule 4-2(a)(5) explains that an
appellant shall create an abstract of the material parts of all the transcripts in the record, and
that transcript information is material if it is essential for the appellate court to confirm its
jurisdiction, to understand the case, and to decide the issues on appeal.
The deficiencies we note above require us to order rebriefing in this case. Therefore,
in accordance with Rule 4-2(b)(3), we order appellant to file a substituted brief that complies
with our rules within fifteen days from the date of entry of this order. While we have noted
specific briefing deficiencies, we encourage counsel to review the contents of Rule 4-2 prior
to submitting his substituted brief to make sure that the substituted brief complies with our
rules and that no additional deficiencies are present.
Rebriefing ordered.
WYNNE and VAUGHT, JJ., agree.
Banks Law Firm, by: Charles A. Banks and Robert W. Francis, for appellant.
Dustin McDaniel, Att’y Gen., by: James O. Howe, Ass’t Att’y Gen., for appellee.
2