Legal Opinion · Dissent

Edwards v. Arkansas Department of Human Services

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided November 5, 2015No. CV-15-395Published

1DissentCourtney Hudson Goodson, Justice

The expedition of the appellate process is our stated goal in dependency-neglect cases. Ashcroft v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 2009 Ark. 461, 2009 WL 3162287 (per curiam) (citing Ratliff v. Ark. Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 371 Ark. 534, 268 S.W.3d 322 (2007)); see also Schubert v. Ark. Dep’t of Human Servs., 2009 Ark. 596, 357 S.W.3d 458. Rather than adhering to this important policy in matters involving children, the majority chooses to parse words and to reach a result that is both illogical and inconsistent with this court’s caselaw. I dissent.

In this ease, the circuit court denied…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Ford v. FordSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2002
  2. West v. Arkansas Department of Human ServicesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2008
  3. Ratliff v. Arkansas Department of Health & Human ServicesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2007
  4. Arkansas Department of Human Services v. DenmonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2009
  5. Schubert v. Arkansas Department of Human ServicesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2009

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

Powered by the Exa API