Betty Ann Parker v. David Allen Sebourn, 351 Ark. 453

Summary

The Supreme Court of Arkansas affirmed the denial of Betty Ann Parker’s motion to set aside an order terminating her parental rights. The court held that the motion, filed nearly four years after the termination order, was untimely under Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 60 because no applicable exception was asserted. A concurrence agreed on procedural grounds, while a dissent argued that the chancery court lacked authority to grant a private litigant’s request to terminate parental rights.

Holdings

1. A motion to modify or vacate the judgment filed nearly four years after entry is untimely when the movant does not invoke any applicable exception under Rule 60(c).
2. An untimely jurisdictional challenge is not excused unless the lower court lacked jurisdiction in any and all circumstances; because Arkansas Code Annotated section 16-13-304(d) gave the chancery court concurrent jurisdiction over termination cases, the court was not wholly without subject-matter jurisdiction.
3. The court did not reach the merits of Parker's argument that the termination order violated Arkansas public policy because the appeal was procedurally barred.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Parker's nearly four-year-old motion to set aside the parental-rights termination order was timely under Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 60.
2. Whether the asserted lack of subject-matter jurisdiction excused Parker's failure to challenge the termination order within the time permitted by Rule 60.
3. Whether the termination statute, as applied, violated Arkansas public policy against bastardization of children.

Disposition

affirmed