Hay v. Arkansas Department of Human Services

286 S.W.3d 725, 374 Ark. 216, 2008 Ark. LEXIS 469
CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas
DecidedSeptember 11, 2008
Docket08-990
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 286 S.W.3d 725 (Hay v. Arkansas Department of Human Services) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hay v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 286 S.W.3d 725, 374 Ark. 216, 2008 Ark. LEXIS 469 (Ark. 2008).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Leah Lanford, the court-appointed attorney ad litem for juveniles S.S., M.H., and B.M., and Keith L. Chrestman, a qualified part-time attorney ad litem, filed a joint motion for substitution of appellate counsel to allow Lanford to withdraw as counsel and to appoint Chrestman as the attorney ad litem on appeal. Pursuant to Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 6-10 (2008), “[a]fter the notice of the appeal has been filed with the Circuit Clerk, the appellate court shall have exclusive jurisdiction to relieve counsel and appoint new counsel.” Thus, we grant the motion to substitute Chrestman as the attorney ad litem in this case.

Motion granted.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In Re Archer
286 S.W.3d 725 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
286 S.W.3d 725, 374 Ark. 216, 2008 Ark. LEXIS 469, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hay-v-arkansas-department-of-human-services-ark-2008.