# In re Haynes

> Supreme Court of Arkansas · March 7, 2013 · 426 S.W.3d 411

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5115367

## Case

- **Full name:** In re Jeffrey Lee HAYNES
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Arkansas
- **Decided:** March 7, 2013
- **Citations:** 426 S.W.3d 411; 2013 Ark. 102; 2013 Ark. LEXIS 123; 2013 WL 850183
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Danielson
- **Judges:** Danielson, Hannah, Hoofman
- **Cited by:** 2 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5115367

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding that the attorney had presented sufficient proof of rehabilitation after concluding that the attorney was eligible for readmission

## Opinion text

PAUL E. DANIELSON, Justice, concurring.
I concur in the granting of Haynes’s petition for readmission and write simply to call yet again, as I have done previously, for the reexamination of our rules regarding sanction, disbarment, and readmission due to the disparity of treatment that so often occurs from case to case. See In re Petition for Readmission of Harold Wayne Madden to the Arkansas Bar, 2012 Ark. 279 , 423 S.W.3d 39 (Danielson, J., dissenting). It is this court that is charged with regulating the practice of law. See In re Petition 8of Butcher, 322 Ark. 24 , 907 S.W.2d 715 (1995). Therefore, it is this court’s responsibility to see that attorneys seeking readmission are treated both fairly and equally. Until we reexamine our rules, we cannot so guarantee. Accordingly, I respectfully concur.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5115367. Public record. Not legal advice.