Dustin Tuck v. Arkansas Department of Human Services
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS
No.
08-1240
DUSTIN TUCK,
Opinion Delivered December
4, 2008
APPELLANT,
PETITION FOR REVIEW
VS.
ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN
SERVICES, MINOR CHILD,
APPELLEES,
DENIED.
PER CURIAM
APPEAL & ERROR – ARGUM ENTS NOT CONSIDERED – APPELLEE DID NOT COM PLY WITH ARK. SUP. CT .
R. 4-2.– Because Arkansas Supreme Court Rule 4-2 prohibits the supreme court from accepting
briefs in support of petitions for review, the court could not consider appellee’s arguments made
in its Brief in Support of Petition for Rehearing; the court will not accept a brief in support of the
review petition and will not consider a brief in support of the rehearing petition.
Booth Law Firm, PLC, by: Frank Booth, for appellant.
Gray Allen Turner, Office of Chief Counsel, for appellee.
Rule 2-4 of the Rules of the Arkansas Supreme Court require petitions for review to
“briefly and distinctly state the basis upon which the case should be reviewed” and “may include
citations to authority or references to statutes or constitutional provisions.”
Although
subsection (b) of that rule prohibits briefs in support of review petitions, it allows petitioners
to attach a copy of their petition for rehearing before the Court of Appeals. Rule 2-3 dictates
the procedure and requirements of petitions for rehearing and allows a brief in support to be
filed with a petition for rehearing.
Appellee, the Arkansas Department of Human Services, claimed in its petition for
review that the Court of Appeals “made errors of fact and law and should be reversed.” The
petition fails to note with particularity what it believes those errors to be and upon what
grounds this court should grant review.
Although Appellee attached its petition for rehearing,
it is a nearly identical copy of the review petition and gives no additional argument or citation
to authority. Appellee also attached its Brief in Support of Petition for Rehearing to its review
petition, and it is in that document that Appellee makes its substantive argument regarding the
errors it believes the appellate court made.
Because Rule 2-4 prohibits this court from
accepting briefs in support of petitions for review, we cannot consider the arguments made in
the Brief in Support of the Petition for Rehearing.
For purposes of clarification to the Bar, this court will only consider the Petition for
Review filed with this court pursuant to Rule 2-4 and, if attached to the review petition, the
Petition for Rehearing to the Court of Appeals.
It will not accept a brief in support of the
review petition and will not consider a brief in support of the rehearing petition.
Appellee’s petition for review is denied.
-2-
08-1240
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
