Opinion highlights for the week of November 2, 2025

 

In terms of opinions released, this was a slower week for our appellate courts.  The Arkansas Supreme Court handed down one decision, while the Arkansas Court of Appeals handed down twelve.  A couple of those Court of Appeals decisions are worth noting here.

Richardson v. State, 2025 Ark. App. 527, involved an appeal from a trial court's decision to extend Richardson's probation.  One of his arguments was that the trial court abused its discretion by failing to explain the basis for its decision.  Among other reasons given for not reaching this argument, the Court of Appeals noted a lack of authority for the argument:

Richardson fails to cite any authority (case law, statute, or court rule) to support his contention. ... [H]e fails to present persuasive authority to support his argument. ... We do not research or develop an appellant's argument for him.

Id. at 5.

Note how the court illustrated "authority" - by reference to "case law, statute, or court rule" but not to anything else.  That list omits authoritative treatises, commentaries to model codes such as the UCC or the Model Penal Code, annotations, and so on.  That list is also consistent with a UALR Bowen law review article's conclusion that our appellate courts do not generally rely upon secondary authority; that article is cited and summarized here: https://areylaw.blogspot.com/2024/10/useful-articles-michael-beaird.html

If all I have is secondary authority, I'll use it.  But Richardson is at least a reminder that the preference is for "case law, statute, or court rule."

Jones v. MNLRN, LLC, 2025 Ark. App. 537, contains this footnote addressing denials of summary judgment:

9 Under this point, Jones observes that in the trial court’s order denying the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment, the trial court had found that the relevant documents were ambiguous. However, the denial of a summary-judgment motion is not an appealable order and is not subject to review on appeal, even after a trial on the merits.  We review the final judgment, which is tested upon the record as it existed at the time it is rendered.

 

Id. at 17 n. 9 (citations omitted).  Not only are denials of summary judgment not appealable orders or reviewable on appeal, but any trial court findings upon denial should be handled with caution.

Thanks for reading.