{
  "id": 8452561,
  "name": "Kirby ARBAUGH v. A.G. PROCESSING, INC.",
  "name_abbreviation": "Arbaugh v. A.G. Processing, Inc.",
  "decision_date": "2004-09-16",
  "docket_number": "04-682",
  "first_page": "432",
  "last_page": "433",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "358 Ark. 432"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "191 S.W.3d 539"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "336 Ark. 264",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        51310
      ],
      "weight": 3,
      "year": 1999,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/336/0264-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 122,
    "char_count": 1334,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.767,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.20409297993821263
    },
    "sha256": "b06df61f759360b12a18eade0e382363b17459a07c8f4dd3bcd6684f74e596e8",
    "simhash": "1:7d0542fe3aa0fe69",
    "word_count": 219
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:06:33.181986+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Kirby ARBAUGH v. A.G. PROCESSING, INC."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nAppellant, Kirby Arbaugh, has tendered a petition am. review from a 6-3 court of appeals\u2019 decision affirming the workers\u2019 compensation commission. In his petition, appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence.\nWe grant appellant\u2019s petition. In granting this petition for review, we note that appellee contends that the petition for review was not timely filed. We disagree. The petition was timely tendered to our clerk for filing on June 18, 2004. The filing fee was not paid until June 23, 2004.\nIn D.B. Griffin Warehouse, Inc. v. Sanders, 336 Ark. 264, 986 S.W.2d 835 (1999), we endorsed the practice of the clerk\u2019s office to accept records as timely filed when the records are tendered on time and when the filing fee is subsequently paid. We stated that \u201c[i]n such cases, the date of tender becomes the date of filing, and the record is marked filed as of that date.\u201d Id.\nIn this case, the file-stamp should reflect the date that the petition was tendered, which is June 18, 2004. Accordingly, we conclude that the petition for review was timely filed.\nPetition granted.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Frederick S. \u201cRick\u201d Spencer, for appellant.",
      "Anderson, Murphy & Hopkins, L.L.P., by: Randy P. Murphy, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Kirby ARBAUGH v. A.G. PROCESSING, INC.\n04-682\n191 S.W.3d 539\nSupreme Court of Arkansas\nOpinion delivered September 16,2004\nFrederick S. \u201cRick\u201d Spencer, for appellant.\nAnderson, Murphy & Hopkins, L.L.P., by: Randy P. Murphy, for appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0432-01",
  "first_page_order": 458,
  "last_page_order": 459
}