IMODEL J. FRANKLIN and NATHAN B. FRANKLIN APPELLANTS
WALDRON NURSING CENTER, INC.; ESTATE OF THURMAN J. FRANKLIN BY AND THROUGH THE SPECIAL ADMINISTRATOR, DONALD GOODNER; RICHARD D. FRANKLIN; ARGIE N. NICHOLS; and SOUTH PARKS PROPERTIES, LLC APPELLEES
FROM THE SCOTT COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. 64CV-13-19]
HONORABLE TERRY SULLIVAN, JUDGE.
Walters, Gaston, Allison & Parker, Attorneys at Law, by:
Troy Gaston, for appellant Imodel J. Franklin.
W. Price, for appellant Nathan B. Franklin.
Jesse Law Firm, P.L.C., by: Mark Alan Jesse, for appellees
Richard D. Franklin, Argie N. Nichols, and South Parks
WAYMOND M. BROWN, Judge.
Franklin and her son Nathan Franklin separately appeal the
Scott County Circuit Court's order finding that Imodel
had failed to present sufficient evidence to support the
imposition of a constructive trust on certain real property
she had conveyed from a family trust to South Parks
Properties, LLC. Imodel argues that the circuit court erred
by not imposing a constructive trust because it was not her
intention to transfer the real property to the limited
liability company. In addition to the issues raised by
Imodel, Nathan further argues that the court erred in
entering a personal judgment against him for the cost of the
nursing-home services, contending that the judgment should be
in a representative capacity only. He also argues that the
court erred in not assessing costs against a party who
presented false evidence. However, we do not address the
issues raised due to deficiencies in appellants'
abstracts, addendums, and briefs.
Supreme Court Rule 4-2(a)(8) requires that an appellant's
brief include an addendum consisting of all documents
essential to this court's resolution of the issues on
appeal, including exhibits. Imodel Franklin is the only
appellant to include an addendum with her brief. Among the
documents not included in the addendum are the court's
letter opinions deciding the case, the deed conveying the
property from the trust to the limited liability company, and
the power of attorney Imodel was granted by her late husband,
Thurman Franklin. Letter opinions are specifically required
to be included in the addendum. The deed is necessary because
questions are raised concerning its validity due to alleged
in the addendum is a transcript attached to Nathan's
posttrial brief of the trial testimony of two representatives
of the nursing home. This testimony is also abstracted. This
was improper because the testimony should be abstracted only
and the transcripts should not be included in the
Franklin's brief on appeal has no addendum with
supporting documentation for his points regarding the
personal judgment against him or that costs should have been
assessed against appellee Argie Nichols. As an appellant,
it was his duty to include all documentation necessary to our
understanding of the case and our decision of the issues that
have been presented to us.
order Imodel Franklin and Nathan Franklin to submit
substituted briefs, abstracts, and addenda correcting the
above-referenced deficiencies within fifteen days. We
encourage counsel to review Rule 4-2 of the Rules of the
Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals to ensure that
the substituted briefs, abstracts, and addenda comply with
the rules and that no additional deficiencies are present.
After service of the substituted briefs, abstracts, and
addenda, appellees shall have an opportunity to revise or
supplement their brief in the time prescribed by the clerk or
to rely on the brief that they previously filed in this
Harrison and Hixson, JJ., agree.