Helton v. Arkansas Department of Human Services

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Helton v. Arkansas Department of Human Services

828 S.W.2d 842, 309 Ark. 268, 1992 Ark. LEXIS 287, 1992 WL 100396

CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas

DecidedMay 4, 1992

Docket91-324

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 828 S.W.2d 842 (Helton 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

Helton v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, 828 S.W.2d 842, 309 Ark. 268, 1992 Ark. LEXIS 287, 1992 WL 100396 (Ark. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Steele Hays, Justice.

The Arkansas Department of Human Services filed a complaint against Jason Shavrome Helton alleging that Helton was the putative father of a child born to Angela Frazier. The Department moved for paternity blood testing pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 9-10-108 (1987). The motion was accompanied by Ms. Frazier’s affidavit asserting that she and Helton had had sexual intercourse during the period of conception and after a hearing, the chancellor ordered Helton to report for paternity testing. Helton brings this appeal from that order.

The Department points out quite correctly that the order, not being final, is not appealable. Ark. R. App. P. 2(a).

We have held in numerous cases that we do not reach the merits of an appeal if the order appealed is not final. Corning Bank and Bailey Bippus v. Delta Rice Mills, Inc., 281 Ark. 342, 663 S.W.2d 737 (1984); Heffner v. Harrod, 278 Ark. 188, 644 S.W.2d 579 (1983); McIlroy Bank & Trust v. Zuber, 275 Ark. 345, 629 S.W.2d 304 (1982); Roberts Enter., Inc. v. Arkansas Highway Comm’n, 277 Ark. 25, 638 S.W.2d 675 (1982). In these and other cases we have stated that in order for a judgment to be appealable, it must dismiss the parties from the court, discharge them from the action or conclude their rights to the subject matter in controversy. See also Johnson v. Johnson, 243 Ark. 656, 421 S.W.2d 605 (1967), and Fratesi v. Bond, 282 Ark. 213, 666 S.W.2d 712 (1984).

Appeal dismissed.

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

Steele Hays, Justice.

The Arkansas Department of Human Services filed a complaint against Jason Shavrome Helton alleging that Helton was the putative father of a child born to Angela Frazier. The Department moved for paternity blood testing pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 9-10-108 (1987). The motion was accompanied by Ms. Frazier’s affidavit asserting that she and Helton had had sexual intercourse during the period of conception and after a hearing, the chancellor ordered Helton to report for paternity testing. Helton brings this appeal from that order.

The Department points out quite correctly that the order, not being final, is not appealable. Ark. R. App. P. 2(a).

We have held in numerous cases that we do not reach the merits of an appeal if the order appealed is not final. Corning Bank and Bailey Bippus v. Delta Rice Mills, Inc., 281 Ark. 342, 663 S.W.2d 737 (1984); Heffner v. Harrod, 278 Ark. 188, 644 S.W.2d 579 (1983); McIlroy Bank & Trust v. Zuber, 275 Ark. 345, 629 S.W.2d 304 (1982); Roberts Enter., Inc. v. Arkansas Highway Comm’n, 277 Ark. 25, 638 S.W.2d 675 (1982). In these and other cases we have stated that in order for a judgment to be appealable, it must dismiss the parties from the court, discharge them from the action or conclude their rights to the subject matter in controversy. See also Johnson v. Johnson, 243 Ark. 656, 421 S.W.2d 605 (1967), and Fratesi v. Bond, 282 Ark. 213, 666 S.W.2d 712 (1984).

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

828 S.W.2d 842, 309 Ark. 268, 1992 Ark. LEXIS 287, 1992 WL 100396, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/helton-v-arkansas-department-of-human-services-ark-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack