Overstreet v. Overstreet
2013 Ark. App. 710
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Gary and Crystal Overstreet divorced in 2012; one minor child, Amelia (b. 2/28/2004).
- Temporary custody had been placed with Crystal; divorce decree awarded Crystal custody, standard visitation to Gary, and set child support and arrearage.
- Decree gave Crystal possession of the marital home during the child’s minority and ordered the parties to share the mortgage equally; allocated some marital debts and awarded certain vehicles to Gary.
- Gary appealed five issues: custody award, child-support amount, home possession and mortgage allocation, ownership of a boat/trailer, and alleged inequitable debt allocation and omitted debts.
- Appellate court affirmed custody to Crystal, affirmed child support but corrected the chart amount, reversed and remanded debt allocation (including omitted debts and possible reconsideration of mortgage allocation), and reversed the trial court’s finding that a third party owned the boat/trailer.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Overstreet) | Defendant's Argument (Crystal) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Custody of child | Gary argued trial court overemphasized one factor (Crystal as primary caregiver) and ignored other best-interest factors; he claimed greater stability and fitness | Crystal pointed to Gary’s anger, gambling, past suicide attempt, questionable parenting practices, and her role as primary caregiver | Affirmed: No clear error; appellate court defers to trial court credibility findings and best-interest determination |
| Child support amount & arrearage | Gary argued net income was miscalculated, income had decreased, and arrearage was overstated | Crystal relied on trial-court finding of biweekly income of $1,750 and chart-based support; proved arrearage to hearing date | Affirmed in substance but modified support figure: correct chart amount is $277 every two weeks (not $287); arrearage award affirmed |
| Possession of marital home and mortgage allocation | Gary argued it was inequitable to give Crystal possession and require him to pay half mortgage while other debts were unequally allocated | Crystal retained possession for child’s stability; court split mortgage obligation equally | Remanded: Trial court must readdress omitted debts; reconsider overall debt allocation and mortgage sharing to achieve an equitable division |
| Ownership of boat and trailer | Gary argued trial court could not grant ownership to a nonparty (James Manning) | Trial court found boat informally mortgaged to Manning and forfeited for nonpayment | Reversed: Trial court may find the boat is not marital property but cannot adjudicate ownership in favor of a nonparty; ownership dispute left to parties to pursue separately |
Key Cases Cited
- Bass v. Bass, 387 S.W.3d 218 (Ark. Ct. App. 2011) (child-support orders must state chart amount and whether court deviated from chart)
- Grace v. Grace, 930 S.W.2d 362 (Ark. 1996) (trial court may not adjudicate ownership rights in favor of a nonparty)