Fell v. Fell
2015 Ark. App. 590
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- James purchased a house in June 2007 for $111,000, made an $11,000 down payment, and the deed and mortgage were in his name; he refinanced in 2012 and paid the mortgage from his separate account.
- Camme moved in before marriage, the parties married in May 2008, had a child, and during the marriage made improvements to the house (driveway, patio, flooring, kitchen upgrades).
- At divorce, equity in the home was about $35,000 (value $125,000 less $90,000 mortgage); trial court awarded James his $11,000 down payment and split the remaining equity $12,000 to each party.
- Four credit-card accounts with total debt about $19,254 were at issue; Camme testified she opened and used the cards for marital expenses and James occasionally paid them; James denied knowing about these specific cards or that they were in his name.
- Trial court found the house had been treated as the marital home (but treated distribution under nonmarital-property statute), awarded Camme $12,000 from the home equity, and found the credit-card debt marital to be divided equally; James appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Fell) | Defendant's Argument (Camme) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Characterization/division of house equity | House was James’s nonmarital property; he paid down and held title and mortgage — he should keep all equity | House was treated and improved as the marital home; marital funds and efforts increased/maintained value — Camme entitled to share | Trial court erred in calling the house marital, but under §9-12-315(a)(2) it permissibly awarded Camme $12,000 from nonmarital equity because marital funds/improvements justified awarding her some benefit (affirmed) |
| Liability for credit-card debt | James denied knowledge of the specific cards and that they were in his name; argues debt not marital | Camme testified cards were used for marital expenses and James knew/occasionally paid; debt incurred during marriage | Trial court credited Camme’s testimony; held the $19,254 was marital debt to be equally divided (affirmed) |
Key Cases Cited
- Box v. Box, 312 Ark. 550 (1993) (nonmarital property remains separate but court may award some benefit to nonowning spouse when marital funds reduce debt or improve separate property)
- Farrell v. Farrell, 365 Ark. 465 (2006) (standard of review: affirm trial-court findings of fact unless clearly erroneous; trial court credibility determinations given deference)
- Jones v. Jones, 432 S.W.3d 36 (Ark. 2014) (nonmarital property does not convert to marital by expenditure of marital funds, but nonowning spouse may receive benefit when marital funds are expended)
- Gilliam v. Gilliam, 374 S.W.3d 108 (Ark. App. 2010) (de novo review framework for division-of-property issues)
- Keathley v. Keathley, 61 S.W.3d 219 (Ark. App. 2001) (appellate deference to trial court credibility findings)