{
  "id": 1240942,
  "name": "J. Stephen WARNOCK v. Ann WARNOCK (Laser)",
  "name_abbreviation": "Warnock v. Warnock",
  "decision_date": "1999-05-20",
  "docket_number": "98-698",
  "first_page": "540",
  "last_page": "541",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "337 Ark. 540"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "989 S.W.2d 922"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 127,
    "char_count": 1481,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.78,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 2.1995933875888662e-07,
      "percentile": 0.7625160425537201
    },
    "sha256": "e7cc90d544b64ae9c4b703f5768bd41f2c4e30415a68921c6c38921ad196e91a",
    "simhash": "1:1618e1697668ac18",
    "word_count": 244
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T14:46:43.806602+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Glaze, J., not participating."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "J. Stephen WARNOCK v. Ann WARNOCK (Laser)"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nAppellee, Ann Warnock Laser, brings her motion for the release of appellant\u2019s supersedeas bond, paid to this court to stay collection of the judgment against her former husband, Stephen Warnock, in the Pulaski County Chancery Court, asking that said funds be released to her in satisfaction of the judgment against appellant in her favor. Appellant responds contending that the amount of the bond is in excess of any amount owed to appellee and arguing to this court concerning the appropriate amounts owed to appellee. Both parties have also raised an issue concerning attorneys\u2019 fees.\nBoth the motion and the responses raise issues of factual determination, the same issues raised to this court in appellant\u2019s appeal to this court, which we declined to address due to the insufficiency of the abstract and record. We are not, therefore, in a position to address such matters now with regard to the release of the supersedeas bond. We deny as premature the motion to release the supersedeas bond, and refer the matter to the trial court to determine the sum of money to which each party is entitled from the bond, to address the issue of attorneys\u2019 fees, and to thereafter advise this court of those determinations.\nMotion denied and remanded.\nGlaze, J., not participating.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "T. David Carruth, for appellant.",
      "Melinda R. Gilbert, P.A., for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "J. Stephen WARNOCK v. Ann WARNOCK (Laser)\n98-698\n989 S.W.2d 922\nSupreme Court of Arkansas\nOpinion delivered May 20, 1999\nT. David Carruth, for appellant.\nMelinda R. Gilbert, P.A., for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0540-01",
  "first_page_order": 564,
  "last_page_order": 565
}