Legal Opinion

White v. ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided April 2, 2009No. 09-221Published

1Opinion of the Court

MOTION FOR RULE ON CLERK

2Per 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…

3Cases cited3 opinions

  1. McDonald v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2004
  2. Moore v. Arkansas Department of Human ServicesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2005
  3. Latiolais v. Arkansas Department of Human ServicesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2006

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

Powered by the Exa API