White v. ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES

Supreme Court of Arkansas

White v. ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES

2009 Ark. 173, 300 S.W.3d 499, 2009 Ark. LEXIS 225

Supreme Court of Arkansas·Decided April 2, 2009·No. 09-221·Published

Opinion

MOTION FOR RULE ON CLERK

PER CURIAM.

Natasha White, by and through her attorney Jesse L. Kearney, has filed a motion for rule on clerk to accept the record and permission to file a belated brief. Attorney Kearney states in the motion that he is at fault for failing to perfect the appeal.

We now entertain motions for rule on clerk in appeals from termination of parental rights. See Moore v. Arkansas Dep’t of Human Servs., 363 Ark. 205, 212 S.W.3d 1 (2005). We afford indigent parents in termination of parental rights actions similar protections afforded indigent criminal defendants. Latiolais v. Arkansas Dep’t of Human Servs., 368 Ark. 381, 382, 246 S.W.3d 413 (2006). As attorney Kearney has admitted fault, we grant the motion for rule on clerk. See Moore, supra; McDonald v. State, 356 Ark. 106, 146 S.W.3d 883 (2004). A copy of this opinion will be forwarded to the Arkansas Supreme Court committee on Professional Conduct.

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

MOTION FOR RULE ON CLERK

PER CURIAM.

Natasha White, by and through her attorney Jesse L. Kearney, has filed a motion for rule on clerk to accept the record and permission to file a belated brief. Attorney Kearney states in the motion that he is at fault for failing to perfect the appeal.

We now entertain motions for rule on clerk in appeals from termination of parental rights. See Moore v. Arkansas Dep’t of Human Servs., 363 Ark. 205, 212 S.W.3d 1 (2005). We afford indigent parents in termination of parental rights actions similar protections afforded indigent criminal defendants. Latiolais v. Arkansas Dep’t of Human Servs., 368 Ark. 381, 382, 246 S.W.3d 413 (2006). As attorney Kearney has admitted fault, we grant the motion for rule on clerk. See Moore, supra; McDonald v. State, 356 Ark. 106, 146 S.W.3d 883 (2004). A copy of this opinion will be forwarded to the Arkansas Supreme Court committee on Professional Conduct.

White v. ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES, 2009 Ark. 173, 300 S.W.3d 499, 2009 Ark. LEXIS 225 (Ark. 2009).

Pincite

2009 Ark. 173 (White v. ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related