We agree with the Bartons' argument and therefore grant their motion to strike DHS's brief. We recently addressed this issue in Washington County Regional Medical Center v. Northwest Physicians, LLC, 2018 Ark. App. 497. There, we declined to consider arguments raised in an appellee's brief in which the party had neither appealed nor cross-appealed but argued in favor of the appellant and sought affirmative relief from this court. We reasoned that the party did not file a notice of appeal as required by Arkansas Rule of Appellate Procedure–Civil 3(b) (2017) and was therefore not an appellant. As an appellee, Dr. Shaun Senter failed to file a notice of cross-appeal as required by the same rule. Id. We noted that when there is no notice of cross-appeal, we will not consider the issue raised by an appellee. Id. at 8, n. 2 (citing Egg City of Ark., Inc. v. Rushing, 304 Ark. 562, 566, 803 S.W.2d 920, 923 (1991); Elcare, Inc. v. Gocio, 267 Ark. 605, 593 S.W.2d 159 (1980); Slaton v. Slaton, 336 Ark. 211, 219–20, 983 S.W.2d 951, 956 (1999) (declining to address appellee's claim for additional affirmative relief on appeal because the record contained no notice of cross-appeal filed by appellee)). Second, we noted that the "appellee brief" constituted an untimely attempt to file an appellant's brief because it was filed one month after the due date for appellants' briefs in that case. As in the case at bar, Senter filed his brief in accordance with the appellee's brief due date but argued in favor of the appellant's request for reversal, which prevented the appellee from being able to respond to his arguments. Id. (citing Ark. Cty. v. Desha Cty., 342 Ark. 135, 139–40, 27 S.W.3d 379, 382 (2000) (striking appellee's brief as untimely because it failed to file either a notice of appeal or a notice of cross-appeal, and it filed a brief advancing the appellant's arguments too late to give the remaining appellee an opportunity to respond)); Boyle v. A.W.A, Inc., 319 Ark. 390, 392–93, 892 S.W.2d 242, 244 (1995).
13
