# Key v. Curry

> Supreme Court of Arkansas · October 29, 2015 · 473 S.W.3d 1

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9819949

## Case

- **Full name:** Johnny KEY, in His Official Capacity as Commissioner of the Arkansas Department of Education; Samuel Ledbetter, in His Official Capacity as Chairman, Arkansas State Board of Education; Toyce Newton, in Her Official Capacity as Vice-Chairman, Arkansas State Board of Education; Joe Black, in His Official Capacity as Member, Arkansas State Board of Education; Alice Williams Mahony, in Her Official Capacity as Member, Arkansas State Board of Education; Mireya Reith, in Her Official Capacity as Member Arkansas State Board of Education; Vicki Saviers, in Her Official Capacity as Member, Arkansas State Board of Education; Jay Barth, in His Official Capacity as Member Arkansas State Board of Education; Diane Zook, in Her Official Capacity as Member, Arkansas State Board of Education; And Kim Davis, in His Official Capacity as Member, Arkansas State Board of Education, Appellants, v. Diane CURRY, C.E. McAdoo, Jim Ross, and Doris L. Pendleton, Appellees
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Arkansas
- **Decided:** October 29, 2015
- **Citations:** 473 S.W.3d 1; 2015 Ark. 392; 2015 Ark. LEXIS 607
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Hart
- **Judges:** Robin F. Wynne
- **Cited by:** 3 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/9819949

## Opinion text

Hart, J., concurs.
I agree that this case must be reversed, but I write separately to state my rationale for rejecting the appellees’ argument that appellants’ action in taking control of the Little Rock School District was arbitrary and capricious. In my view, the general assembly has, through Arkansas Code Annotated section 6-15-428 (Repl. 2013), clearly stated that such a challenge must first be appealed to the State Board of Education, and then, if necessary, to the Pulaski County Circuit -Court under the Arkansas Administrative Procedure Act, Arkansas Code Annotated sections 25-15-201 et seq. It is not disputed that the Little Rock School District failed to avail itself of this avenue for challenging the appellees’ actions. Accordingly, this argument should be barred for failure to exhaust the administrative and legal remedies specified by statute.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9819949. Public record. Not legal advice.