Cite as 2012 Ark. 460
alleging that the affidavit attached to the complaint was deficient and that the failure to attach to the complaint a copy of the agreement between Nardi and Citibank constituted a violation of Rule 10(d). The circuit court found that under Rule 10(d), the agreement between Nardi and Citibank had to be attached to the complaint and entered summary judgment in Nardi's favor.[1] We affirm the decision of the circuit court. Our jurisdiction is pursuant to Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 1-2(b)(1) (2012).
Summary judgment may be granted only when no genuine issue of material fact exists requiring trial and when the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs. v. Civitan Ctr., Inc., 2012 Ark. 40, at 7, ___ S.W.3d ___, ___. On appeal this court determines if summary judgment was appropriate based on whether the evidentiary items presented by the moving party have left a material question of fact unanswered. Id., ___ S.W.3d at ___. We view the evidence in the light most favorable to the party against whom the motion was filed, resolving all doubts and inferences against the moving party. Id., ___ S.W.3d at ___. We review issues of interpretation of the rules of civil procedure de novo. Deaver v. Faucon Props., Inc., 367 Ark. 288, 290, 239 S.W.3d 525, 528 (2006).
Rule 10(d) concerns form of pleadings and required exhibits, and states that "[a] copy
- ↑ In an October 13, 2011 letter opinion, the circuit court cited Calvary SPV, LLC v. Anderson, 99 Ark. App. 309, 260 S.W.3d 331 (2007) and noted that under that case, "items such as a signed credit card application along with a card-member agreement" may be sufficient. The circuit court also noted that even if the attachment of a card-member agreement to the motion for summary had been sufficient, LVNV offered nothing to show that this agreement would have been applicable to Nardi.
2
