McNeil v. McNeil
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Not Designated for Publication
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION III
No. CA08-1446
LORRIE ANN MCNEIL (MARSHALL),
APPELLANT
Opinion Delivered
JUNE 24, 2009
APPEAL FROM THE MARION
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT,
[NO. DR-2002-192-4]
V.
DONALD KEITH MCNEIL,
APPELLEE
HONORABLE GORDON WEBB,
JUDGE,
REVERSED AND REMANDED
KAREN R. BAKER, Judge
This is a second appeal arising
from a Yell County divorce decree.
In an
unpublished decision of the first appeal, this court found that the trial court erred in making
an unequal distribution of the marital home and surrounding land without findings that would
support such an award. McNeil v. McNeil, CA04-1138, slip op. at 3 (Ark. App. Nov. 2,
2005). We reversed and remanded the case on this issue with instructions for the trial court
to enter an order of distribution in accordance with Arkansas Code Annotated § 9-12-315.
On remand, the trial court awarded appellant Lorrie Ann McNeil one-half of the value of the
materials used to build the house and ordered her to quitclaim her interest in the house and
twenty acres to appellee Donald Keith McNeil. Appellant asserts that the trial court erred in
not ordering the marital property sold pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated § 9-12-
315(a)(3)(B). We agree. The case is reversed and remanded with instructions to order the
property sold at auction and to distribute the proceeds of the sale equally between the two
parties.
Arkansas Code Annotated § 9-12-315(a)(3)(B) provides as follows:
(B) When it appears from the evidence in the case to the satisfaction of the
court that the real estate is not susceptible of the division as provided for in
this section without great prejudice to the parties interested, the court shall
order a sale of the real estate. The sale shall be made by a commissioner to be
appointed by the court for that purpose at public auction to the highest bidder
upon the terms and conditions and at the time and place fixed by the court. The
proceeds of every such sale, after deducting the cost and expenses of the sale,
including the fee allowed the commissioner by the court for his or her services,
shall be paid into the court and by the court divided among the parties in
proportion to their respective rights in the premises.
Ark. Code Ann. § 9-12-315 (a)(3)(B) (Repl. 2008).
The only relief that appellant seeks is the sale of the property and equal distribution
of the proceeds. The trial court clearly erred in only distributing one-half of the building
costs without regard to the actual value of the house and with no valuation of the twenty
acres of land upon which the house was situated. Accordingly, the case is reversed and
remanded with instructions to order the property sold at auction and the proceeds of the sale
distributed equally between the two parties.
K INARD and H ENRY, JJ., agree.
-2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
