From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hayes v. Lockhart

Supreme Court of Arkansas
Mar 24, 1986
706 S.W.2d 179 (Ark. 1986)

Opinion

No. 86-10

Opinion delivered March 24, 1986

1. ATTORNEY CLIENT — NO ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO COUNSEL IN CIVIL CASES. — There is no absolute right to counsel in a civil action. 2. APPEAL ERROR — PERMISSION TO FILE HANDWRITTEN BRIEFS GRANTED ON PROPER MOTION. — Permission to file a handwritten brief will be granted upon proper motion if appellant makes a substantial showing that his suit has merit and that he is unable to submit a typed brief.

Pro Se Motion for Appointment of Counsel; denied.

Appellant, pro se.

No response.


In this motion appellant, an inmate of the Arkansas Department of Correction, requests appointment of counsel to represent him in the appeal of the denial of a civil motion for declaratory judgment against the Director of the Department of Correction. He bases his motion for counsel on the unavailability of typewriters at the prison, which precludes his submitting a typed brief as required by our rules.

The motion is denied. The appeal is civil in nature, and there is no absolute right to counsel in a civil action. Virgin v. Lockhart, 288 Ark. 92, 702 S.W.2d 9 (1986).

If the lack of a typewriter is hindering appellant's access to this Court, he may seek permission to proceed pro se with a handwritten brief. As we said in Glick v. Lockhart, 288 Ark. 417, 706 S.W.2d 178 (1986), which was also decided today, permission to file a handwritten brief will be granted upon proper motion if appellant makes a substantial showing that his suit has merit and that he is unable to submit a typed brief.

Motion denied.

PURTLE, J., not participating.


Summaries of

Hayes v. Lockhart

Supreme Court of Arkansas
Mar 24, 1986
706 S.W.2d 179 (Ark. 1986)
Case details for

Hayes v. Lockhart

Case Details

Full title:Roosevelt HAYES v. A.L. LOCKHART, Director, Arkansas Department of…

Court:Supreme Court of Arkansas

Date published: Mar 24, 1986

Citations

706 S.W.2d 179 (Ark. 1986)
706 S.W.2d 179

Citing Cases

Coble v. Lockhart

We have held that handwritten briefs will be accepted where the petitioner shows that he has no access to a…

Miner v. Furman

We have held, however, that if the pro se appellant makes a substantial showing that he is entitled to relief…