Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Martin v. Arkansas Department of Health & Human Services

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided April 26, 2007No. 07-245Published

1ConcurrenceRobert L. Brown, Justice

I must confess to having some sympathy for the attorney, Val Price, in this case. Effective July 1, 2006, this court amended Supreme Court Rule 6-9 to shorten the time frame for filing a notice of appeal from thirty days, which is the standard time frame for filing the notice, to fourteen days. Sup. Ct. R. 6-9(b)(2). The obvious intent of this court was to expedite these appeals involving termination-of-parental-rights cases.

At the same time we shortened the time frame for filing a notice of appeal, we added a non-standard requirement for filing notices of appeal in these cases. We required,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Flannery v. Arkansas Department of Health & Human ServicesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2006
  2. Latiolais v. Arkansas Department of Human ServicesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2006
  3. Werts v. Arkansas Department of Human ServicesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API