# A.R. v. Brown

> Court of Appeals of Arkansas · June 18, 2008 · 103 Ark. App. 1

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9690500

## Case

- **Full name:** In the Matter of A.R., a Minor, and Randy L. Roberts v. Reid Alan BROWN, and Allison Roberts Brown
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Arkansas
- **Decided:** June 18, 2008
- **Citations:** 103 Ark. App. 1; 285 S.W.3d 716; 2008 Ark. App. LEXIS 496
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Hart
- **Judges:** Robert J. Gladwin
- **Cited by:** 11 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/9690500

## Opinion text

Josephine Linker Hart, Judge, concurring. I write separately because I believe that the appellant deserves some analysis of his argument concerning the so-called “remedial measures.” Appellant asserts that pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 9-9-220(c)(1)(C)(i), his payment of over $1,600 toward his $11,760 child support arrearage constituted a “substantial amount” of past-due support, and therefore, the adoption should not have proceeded. I agree with appellant. As the trial judge noted, in light of all the expenses that he had incurred as well as his temporarily debilitating accident, he had made a “pretty good” effort.
However, section 9-9-220(c)(1)(C)(i) also requires that the absent parent “establish a relationship with his or her child or children.” Appellant claims that this portion of the statute did not impose additional requirements on him because “all of the evidence offered at trial pointed to the fact that Mr. Roberts had established a relationship with his daughter prior to the petition for adoption.” I believe that this contention ignores the fact that the statute defines a failure to visit with a child for one year as “abandonment.” Accordingly, the statute requires us to look not to whatever relationship appellant had abandoned, but rather to the contact that he was able to “establish” after he received notice of an intention to terminate his parental rights. Unfortunately, appellant simply failed to contact his child, and we must affirm the trial court.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9690500. Public record. Not legal advice.