Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

In Re Carrington H.

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided January 29, 2016No. M2014-00453-SC-R11-PTPublished

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

*540SHARON G. LEE, C.J.,

with whom GARY R. WADE, J., joins, concurring in part and dissenting in part.

The Court has decided that an indigent parent has the right to assistance of counsel — but not the right to effective assistance of counsel — in a parental termination proceeding. I believe that the vast majority of lawyers provide competent representation as required by our Rules of Professional Conduct. See Tenn. Sup.Ct. R. 8, RPCs 1.1 & 1.3. But in those rare situations where a lawyer makes a mistake or fails to do his or her duty to such an extent that the termination proceeding is not…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Santosky v. KramerSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Pennsylvania v. FinleySupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  3. Lassiter v. Department of Social Servs. of Durham Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
  4. Ross v. MoffittSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  5. In the Interest of M.S.Texas Supreme Court · 2003

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API