2013 Ark. App. 486
Ark. Ct. App.
2013

THE LAW OFFICES OF CRAIG L. COOK v. DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF WORKFORCE SERVICES, and JUNE GURGEL-ANTESKI

No. E-12-1135

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

SEPTEMBER 11, 2013

2013 Ark. App. 486

KENNETH S. HIXSON, Judge

DIVISION IV; APPEAL FROM THE ARKANSAS BOARD OF REVIEW [NO. 2012-BR-02795]; REBRIEFING ORDERED

KENNETH S. HIXSON, Judge

The Law Offices of Craig L. Cook (hereinafter “Cook” or “the law firm“) appeals the decision of the Arkansas Board of Review that awarded unemployment-compensation benefits to appellee June Gurgel-Anteski. The claimant was found to have been an employee of the law firm who was discharged for reasons other than misconduct connected with the work. Cook contends that the findings are not supported by substantial evidence, requiring reversal. We order rebriefing.

Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2 (2012) sets forth the requirements for appellate briefs. In this instance, appellant‘s brief does not contain the decisions of the administrative agency from which it appeals, namely the decisions of the Appeal Tribunal and Board of Review, as part of the addendum. Those decisions must be included pursuant to Rule 4-2(a)(8)(A)(i). Additionally, appellant‘s brief includes an abstract of the testimony, but it does not include material “colloquies between the court and counsel” as mandated by Rule 4-2(a)(5)(A). The transcript reflects a discussion on the record prior to testimony being taken about the issues presented for decision, which is essential for us to determine what is properly before us for review. We order appellant to include an abstract of that colloquy. Pursuant to Rule 4-2(b)(3), we afford appellant the opportunity to cure these deficiencies within fifteen days of the date of this opinion. Failure to file a compliant brief within fifteen days could result in the Board‘s decision being summarily affirmed for noncompliance with our rules. After service of the substituted abstract, brief, and addendum, the Department of Workforce Services shall have an opportunity to revise or supplement its brief in the time prescribed by the court, or to rely on the brief previously filed in this appeal. See Moody v. Director, 2013 Ark. App. 350.

Rebriefing ordered.

WHITEAKER and VAUGHT, JJ., agree.

The Law Offices of Craig L. Cook, by: Trella A. Sparks and Craig L. Cook, for appellant.

Phyllis A. Edwards, for appellee.