APPEAL FROM THE PULASKI COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, SIXTH DIVISION. NO. 60CV-14-1109. HONORABLE TIMOTHY DAVIS FOX, JUDGE.
Lassiter & Cassinelli, by: Jack T. Lassiter, for appellant.
Tabitha Baertels McNulty, Office of Policy & Legal Services, for appellee.
BRANDON J. HARRISON, Judge. ABRAMSON and GLOVER, JJ., agree.
BRANDON J. HARRISON, Judge
On 26 October 1998, the child-abuse hotline received an allegation that a juvenile had been mistreated. After an investigation, a true finding of child maltreatment was entered. K.D. was named as the offender. The Arkansas State Police notified K.D. of this finding on 9 December 1998; the notification contained the following language:
There was no credible evidence of Child Maltreatment. Pursuant to Act 1341 of 1995, there can be no disclosure of unsubstantiated reports.
There was some credible evidence of Child Maltreatment and was named as the offender(s).
X There was some credible evidence of Child Maltreatment and [K.D.] was named as the offender(s). Circumstances do not indicate that a Protective Services case should be opened for your family.
If you have been the subject of a true report and you disagree with the assessment determination, you may request an administrative hearing within thirty (30) days of the receipt of the hand delivery or mailing of this notice of determination.
The third option, which stated that there was some credible evidence of child maltreatment and named K.D. as the offender, was marked with an " X" as indicated above.
Nothing else happened until October 2013, when K.D. discovered that he was on the child-maltreatment registry and requested an administrative hearing. Before the hearing, DHS moved to dimiss the appeal, arguing that K.D. had been served with notice of the true finding in December 1998, that he had not requested a hearing within thirty days of receipt of the notice, and that his request should now be dismissed as untimely. K.D. responded that the notice he received did not adequately ...