ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
DAVID M. GLOVER, JUDGE
DIVISION IV
CURTIS A. BYRAM
APPELLANT
V.
CHERYL L. BYRAM
APPELLEE
CA07581
January 30, 2008
APPEAL FROM THE UNION
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
[DR20064712]
HONORABLE MICHAEL R.
LANDERS, CIRCUIT JUDGE
AFFIRMED
Appellant, Curtis Byram, appeals from the trial court’s division of marital property
and debt in the divorce decree ending appellant’s marriage to appellee, Cheryl Byram.
He contends that the trial court erred 1) in concluding that he owned stock in a
corporation and in awarding appellee an interest in that corporation, and 2) in allocating
all of the debt to him. We affirm.
Our supreme court explained the standard of review for propertydivision cases in
Taylor v. Taylor, 369 Ark. 31, ____ , ____S.W.3d ___, ____ (2007) (quoting Farrell v.
Farrell, 365 Ark. at 469, 231 S.W.3d at ___ (2006)):
2
On appeal, divorce cases are reviewed de novo. With respect to the division
of property, we review the trial court’s findings of fact and affirm them unless they
are clearly erroneous, or against the preponderance of the evidence; the division of
property itself is also reviewed and the same standard applies. A finding is clearly
erroneous when the reviewing court, on the entire evidence, is left with the definite
and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed. In order to demonstrate
that the trial court’s ruling was erroneous, the appellant must show that the trial
court abused its discretion by making a decision that was arbitrary or groundless.
We give due deference to the chancellor’s superior position to determine the
credibility of witnesses and the weight to be given their testimony.
In his first point of appeal, appellant contends that the trial court’s finding that he
had a onethird ownership interest in the Byram Family Corporation was clearly
erroneous and that making that determination without appellant’s father and broth