In Arnold v. Shuck, 24 S.W.3d 470 (Tex. App.--Texarkana 2000. pet. denied), the legal assistant's affidavit merely stated that "she prepared the petition and personally mailed it to the clerk's office . . . and the transmittal letter accompanying the petition was dated April 7, 1999, and that the petition was mailed 'postage pre-paid, either April 7, 1999, or April 8, 1999.'" Id. at 472. Because the affidavit did not comply with each element of the mailbox rule, the Arnold court held that the appellant failed to raise a fact issue on summary judgment. Id. at 473. Therefore, the issue in Arnold was not whether certain missing information defeated application of the mailbox rule, rather, the issue was whether the information actually contained in the affidavit satisfied the rule.