Belk v. Belk, 2015 Ark. App. 682

Rhea Belk executed a will in 1979 leaving ~167 acres to sons Russell and William; she amended the will in 2007 to add Anna Belk (Russell’s daughter) as a beneficiary.
In February 2009 Rhea quitclaimed the property to son William while retaining a life estate, a transfer that effectively disinherited Anna.
William died in January 2013; in March 2013 his heirs executed seven warranty deeds dividing the land among themselves and spouses; Rhea joined those deeds, except for the tract containing her residence.
Anna sued in May 2013 seeking a declaratory judgment that the 2009 and 2013 deeds were invalid for lack of Rhea’s testamentary/mental capacity and filed a lis pendens; appellees counterclaimed, including for slander of title.
The trial court granted summary judgment for appellees declaring Rhea’s signatures on the 2009 and 2013 deeds valid; appellees then voluntarily dismissed their slander-of-title counterclaim without prejudice.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Rhea validly executed the 2009 quitclaim deed (mental capacity)	Anna: Rhea lacked requisite mental capacity in 2009; deed should be invalidated	Heirs/Rhea: Rhea had capacity; deed is valid	Appellate court did not reach the merits (trial court had declared deed valid; appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction)
Whether Rhea’s joinder to the 2013 deeds rendered those conveyances invalid	Anna: 2013 deeds are invalid as they flowed from an invalid 2009 deed and from Rhea’s compromised capacity	Heirs: 2013 warranty deeds valid; Rhea joined voluntarily (except residence tract)	Not reached on merits (trial court declared 2013 deeds valid; appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction)
Effect of Anna’s lis pendens and whether appellants’ actions support a slander-of-title claim	Anna: Lis pendens was proper to protect her claim to title	Heirs: Lis pendens and suit were malicious; slander-of-title claim pleaded	Trial court’s ruling on slander-of-title was not adjudicated on merits; counterclaim was dismissed without prejudice below
Whether the appellate court has jurisdiction to decide the appeal after voluntary dismissal of a compulsory counterclaim without prejudice	Anna: (not raised)	Heirs: dismissal mooted the remaining issues or made order final?	Appellate court held it lacks jurisdiction — dismissal without prejudice of a compulsory counterclaim prevents final, appealable order; appeal dismissed without reaching merits

Crockett v. C.A.G. Investments, Inc., 361 S.W.3d 262 (Ark. 2010) (dismissal without prejudice of compulsory counterclaim prevents final, appealable order)
Bevans v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., 281 S.W.3d 740 (Ark. 2008) (same principle regarding compulsory counterclaims and finality)
Fleming v. Cox Law Firm, 201 S.W.3d 866 (Ark. 2005) (defines slander-of-title and explains lis pendens purpose)