Kelly v. Martin

Summary

The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed a circuit court ruling that Timothy D. Fox was eligible to be a candidate for circuit judge despite a 45-day suspension for late payment of his annual attorney license fee. The court held that the suspension limited Fox’s privilege to practice law but did not terminate his license, so he remained a licensed attorney for purposes of the six-year qualification requirement in Amendment 80, section 16(B) of the Arkansas Constitution. The court also rejected Kelly’s res judicata argument.

Holdings

1. An attorney whose privilege to practice law is automatically suspended for failure to pay the annual license fee remains a licensed attorney because the suspension does not terminate the license or remove the attorney's name from the list of licensed attorneys. Accordingly, Fox satisfied Amendment 80's requirement that a circuit judge have been a licensed attorney for at least six years immediately preceding the date of assuming office.
2. Res judicata did not bar the challenge because Fox's eligibility had not been litigated in the earlier case.
3. The Supreme Court of Arkansas had authority to hear the appeal because it pertained to elections and election procedure.

Questions Presented

1. Whether an attorney automatically suspended from the practice of law for forty-five days because of nonpayment of an annual license fee remains a licensed attorney under Amendment 80, section 16(B) of the Arkansas Constitution.
2. Whether res judicata barred the circuit court from determining Fox's eligibility because another circuit court had considered similar issues involving a different candidate for the same judicial seat.
3. Whether the Supreme Court of Arkansas had appellate jurisdiction over the pre-election eligibility challenge.

Disposition

affirmed