Discretionary appointment of counsel
While a state may have many statutes, court decisions, or court rules governing
appointment of counsel for a particular subject area, a "Key Development" is a
statute/decision/rule that prevails over the others (example: a state high court
decision finding a categorical right to counsel in guardianships cases takes
precedence over a statute saying appointment in guardianship cases is
discretionary).
Litigation, Termination of Parental Rights (Private) - Birth Parents
In Walker v. Walker, 892 A.2d 1053, 1055 (Del. 2006), the Delaware Supreme Court stated that its reasoning from Watson v. Division of Family Services, 813 A. 2d 1101, 1108 (Del. 2002) and Hughes v. Div. of Family Services, 836 A.2d 498, 509 (Del. 2003), which held that the constitutional right to counsel in state-initiated termination and dependency cases is on a case-by-case basis, applies to private termination proceedings.
If "yes",
the established right to counsel or
discretionary appointment of counsel
is
limited
in some way, including any of: the only authority
is a
lower/intermediate court decision or a city council,
not a high court or state legislature; there
has been
a subsequent case that
has
cast doubt; a statute
is
ambiguous; or the right or discretionary appointment
is not
for all types of individuals or proceedings
within that category.
discretionary
no
