424 S.W.3d 812
Ark.2012Background
- 2007 divorce decree awards Rogers the Beverly Drive home and Morgan the Cook Terrace property, with a lien and lis pendens to secure Morgan's obligations to Rogers.
- Divorce decree awards Rogers $3,600 monthly spousal support for 7.5 years and provides for a lien on Rogers's property as collateral for ongoing alimony.
- Notice of lis pendens was filed on November 13, 2007, stating a lien in Rogers's favor upon the subject property and continuing per the divorce decree.
- Benefit Bank foreclosed on the property in 2010, asserting priority mortgage rights on W.C.M. Investments and Morgan's guarantee of the debt.
- Benefit Bank amended its complaint to name Rogers, contending her lis pendens lien was subordinate to its mortgage; Rogers claimed priority.
- Trial court (Jan. 14, 2011) found Rogers' lien valid and superior, the lis pendens satisfied, and Benefit Bank’s mortgage first lien; judgment entered for Benefit Bank against W.C.M. Investments and Morgan.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authority to impose alimony lien | Benefit Bank argues divorce court lacked authority to create a lien for alimony. | Rogers contends divorce court could impose lien if agreed by parties. | Lien imposed by agreement valid; divorce court had authority. |
| Effect of lis pendens on lien status | Benefit Bank argues lis pendens did not create a lien or perfect one. | Rogers contends lis pendens provides notice and may establish priority. | Lis pendens is not a lien but provides priority notice; court affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Warren v. Warren, 273 Ark. 528 (Ark. 1981) (no lien for future alimony; consent governs lien creation)
- Massengale v. Massengale, 186 Ark. 917 (Ark. 1933) (future alimony not a lien unless immediate amount due)
- Jones v. Jones, 204 Ark. 654 (Ark. 1942) (continuing alimony requires arrearage decree to create lien)
- Casteel v. Casteel, 38 Ark. 477 (Ark. 1882) (divorce alimony lien may be limited if imposed involuntarily)
- Ashworth v. Hankins, 241 Ark. 629 (Ark. 1966) (lis pendens serves as notice of pending litigation affecting property)
- McQuillan v. Mercedes-Benz Credit Corp., 331 Ark. 242 (Ark. 1998) (standard of review for bench trial findings; clear error/appreciation of evidence)
- Orr v. Hudson, 2010 Ark. 484 (Ark. 2010) (petitions for review treated as original filings in supreme court)