Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 342
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION III
CV-13-1105
No.
Opinion Delivered May 28, 2014
APPEAL FROM THE SALINE
WILLIAM ROBINSON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
APPELLANT [NO. CV-2010-435]
V. HONORABLE GRISHAM PHILLIPS,
JUDGE
MIDFIRST BANK
APPELLEE AFFIRMED
RHONDA K. WOOD, Judge
MidFirst Bank filed a complaint for foreclosure against William Robinson. The
complaint alleged that Robinson stopped making monthly payments on his house.
MidFirst later filed a motion for summary judgment and attached an affidavit of debt to
meet its summary-judgment burden. See Hoosier v. Interinsurance Exch. of Auto. Club, 2014
Ark. App. 120, ___ S.W.3d ___ (explaining both the lower-court standard for granting
summary judgment as well as our standard of review on appeal). Once the burden shifted,
Robinson failed to meet proof with proof by responding with an affidavit of his own or
any evidence that would establish a disputed material fact. See id. After a hearing, the
circuit court granted summary judgment. Robinson appeals, pro se, from that order. We
affirm.
First, pro se appellants are held to the same standard as those represented by
counsel. Moon v. Holloway, 353 Ark. 520, 110 S.W.3d 250 (2003). Second, we have held
Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 342
that we will not consider an issue if the appellant has failed to cite to any convincing legal
authority in support of his argument. Hope Sch. Dist. v. Wilson, 2011 Ark. App. 219, 382
S.W.3d 782. The failure to develop a point legally or factually is reason enough to affirm
the circuit court. Walters v. Dobbins, 2010 Ark. 260, 370 S.W.3d 209. Here, Robinson’s
one-page argument fails to cite any convincing legal authority. He has not developed his
argument in any way; Robinson fails to specify any grounds on which we are to reverse.
We therefore affirm the circuit court’s order.
Affirmed.
PITTMAN and HIXSON, JJ., agree.
William Robinson, pro se appellant.
Wilson & Associates, PLLC, by: H. Keith Morrison and Samuel S. High, for appellee.
2