Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 331
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION II
No. CV-13-1156
Opinion Delivered May 28, 2014
BERTHA BELLE GRAVES APPEAL FROM THE VAN BUREN
APPELLANT COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
[NO. DR-2012-59]
V.
HONORABLE DAVID M. CLARK,
JUDGE
JAMES JAY GRAVES
APPELLEE DISMISSED
ROBIN F. WYNNE, Judge
Bertha Belle Graves appeals from the trial court’s denial of her motion for new trial in
the parties’ divorce action. She argues on appeal that the trial court erred by denying her
motion because there was no corroboration of grounds, the guardianship of the person and
estate of appellee James Jay Graves is void, and the settlement agreement entered into by the
parties was obtained as a result of duress and coercion. We must dismiss the appeal for lack
of a final order.
An appeal may be taken only from a final judgment or decree entered by the trial
court. Ark. R. App. P.–Civ. 2(a)(1) (2013). Whether an order is final and appealable is a
jurisdictional question that may be raised by this court sua sponte. See Lamont v. Healthcare
Capital, Inc., 2013 Ark. App. 283. For a judgment to be final, it must dismiss the parties from
the court, discharge them from the action, or conclude their rights to the subject matter in
Cite as 2014 Ark. App. 331
controversy. Roberts v. Roberts, 70 Ark. App. 94, 14 S.W.3d 529 (2000). Thus, the order
must put the trial court’s directive into execution, ending the litigation or a separable branch
of it. Id.
The decree orders the parties to agree to a division of their property within fifteen days
of the filing of the decree and states that any property not agreed on is to be sold at auction,
with the proceeds divided between the parties. However, the decree also states that “[i]f after
the sale either party is not satisfied that all items were in fact returned, they have the right to
request a hearing on the issue of the missing items.” The decree does not fully dispose of the
parties’ property and explicitly contemplates the possibility of future litigation with regard to
the subject matter in controversy. The decree is not final for the purposes of appeal;
therefore, the appeal must be dismissed.
Dismissed.
WALMSLEY and HARRISON, JJ., agree.
Worsham Law Firm, P.A., by: Richard E. Worsham, for appellant.
Jensen Young & Houston, PLLC, by: Terence C. Jensen, for appellee.
2