{
  "id": 6136384,
  "name": "Lois A. RAMBO v. DIRECTOR OF LABOR",
  "name_abbreviation": "Rambo v. Director of Labor",
  "decision_date": "1986-05-07",
  "docket_number": "E 86-59",
  "first_page": "17",
  "last_page": "18",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "18 Ark. App. 17"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "709 S.W.2d 411"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark. Ct. App.",
    "id": 13370,
    "name": "Arkansas Court of Appeals"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "17 Ark. App. 152",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        6652885
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1986,
      "opinion_index": 1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark-app/17/0152-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 128,
    "char_count": 1291,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.881,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.1748453288203289
    },
    "sha256": "8f84cf52b1f8e1eb5f397d6cc0d64107f885339ae7146b64f7df78cd88289f63",
    "simhash": "1:44dead65c2377b24",
    "word_count": 237
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:17:44.845649+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Lois A. RAMBO v. DIRECTOR OF LABOR"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nAppellant\u2019s motion for Rule on the Clerk is denied.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      },
      {
        "text": "Melvin Mayfield, Judge,\ndissenting. I regret that I am unable to get in step with the majority of the court. In March of this year, I dissented when the majority granted a motion for Rule on the Clerk and required the clerk to file a transcript from the Workers\u2019 Compensation Commission even though the files of the Commission did not contain a notice of appeal and the appellants admitted the notice they claimed was mailed was \u201clost, misplaced or for some reason failed to get in the file.\u201d See Mullins v. Varner, 17 Ark. App. 152, 705 S.W.2d 17 (1986).\nToday, the majority denies a motion for Rule on the Clerk because the clerk\u2019s files do not contain a notice of appeal, even though the appellant states she mailed a notice of appeal to the clerk the day after she received the decision of the Arkansas Board of Review \u2014 which was well within the 20 days she had to file the appeal. See Ark. Stat. Ann. \u00a7 81-1107(d)(7) (Supp. 1985).\nAlthough I did not agree with the majority in Mullins v. Varner, I see no reason for the majority to reach a different result in today\u2019s case; therefore, I dissent.",
        "type": "dissent",
        "author": "Melvin Mayfield, Judge,"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Lois A. RAMBO v. DIRECTOR OF LABOR\nE 86-59\n709 S.W.2d 411\nCourt of Appeals of Arkansas En Banc\nOpinion delivered May 7, 1986"
  },
  "file_name": "0017-01",
  "first_page_order": 37,
  "last_page_order": 38
}