Legal Opinion
Flores v. Flores
Alaska Supreme Court
Decided July 13, 1979No. 3832PublishedCited by 51 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MATTHEWS, Justice.
This petition for review presents a single issue: whether an indigent party has the *894right to court-appointed counsel in a private child custody proceeding in which her spouse is represented by Alaska Legal Services Corporation (ALSC). We hold that the due process clause of the Alaska Constitution 1 guarantees such a right.
The petition for review stems from a divorce proceeding in which custody of the couple’s child is the only contested issue. The petitioner, Christine Flores, and the respondent, David Flores, are both indigent. Christine is a California resident and…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Stanley v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Meyer v. NebraskaSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Boddie v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Pierce v. Society of SistersSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
- Prince v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by51 opinions
- Treacy v. Municipality of AnchorageAlaska Supreme Court · 2004
- State v. BellSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1982
- Matter of K.L.J.Alaska Supreme Court · 1991
- V.F. v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1983
- Meyer v. MeyerSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1980
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.