Case Title: McGarrah v. McGarrah

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: arkansas

Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

Date: 1996-06-17T00:00:00Z

Document:
Natalie Ann McGARRAH, Appellant v. Joe
McGARRAH, Appellee; Johnny McGarrah and
Sharon McGarrah, Intervenors

94-680                                             ___ S.W.2d ___

                    Supreme Court of Arkansas
                 Opinion delivered June 17, 1996


1.   Appeal & error -- chancery proceedings -- standard of review.
     -- The standard of review of chancery court proceedings is
     whether the chancellor's findings were clearly erroneous or
     clearly against the preponderance of the evidence.  

2.   Appeal & error -- record limited to that which is abstracted -
     - appellant's burden. -- The record on appeal is limited to
     that which is abstracted; it is appellant's burden to produce
     a record sufficient to demonstrate error.

3.   Appeal & error -- abstracting requirements. -- Pursuant to
     Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(a)(6), an appellant is required to
     compile an abstract containing material parts of the
     pleadings, proceedings, facts, documents, and any other
     matters that are necessary for an understanding of all
     questions presented to the appellate court; the orders of the
     lower court, as well as the notice of appeal, are encompassed
     in that requirement.

4.   Appeal & error -- deficient abstract -- merits of appeal not
     reached. -- Where appellant did not abstract any order that
     indicated the chancellor's rulings on the issue of the
     validity of several pre-divorce agreements; where,
     specifically, appellant omitted the final chancery court order
     and the notice of appeal; and where the appellate court could
     not discern from which order or orders the appeal was taken,
     it was impossible for the appellate court to determine whether
     or not the chancellor's rulings on the validity of certain
     pre-divorce agreements were clearly erroneous; because the
     abstract was insufficient for a review of the merits of the
     appeal, the chancellor's decision was affirmed.


     Appeal from Crawford Chancery Court; James Spears, Chancellor;
affirmed.
     Naif Samuel Khoury, for appellant.
     Paul R. Post, for appellee and intervenors.

     Donald L. Corbin, Justice.Associate Justice Donald L.
Corbin, 6-17-96   *ADVREP*SC4*





NATALIE ANN MCGARRAH,
               APPELLANT,

V.

JOE MCGARRAH,
               APPELLEE,

JOHNNY MCGARRAH and SHARON
MCGARRAH, 
               INTERVENORS,


94-680



APPEAL FROM THE CRAWFORD COUNTY
CHANCERY COURT,
NO. E-93-353,
HON. JAMES SPEARS, CHANCELLOR,





AFFIRMED.




     Natalie Ann McGarrah appeals a divorce decree from the
Crawford County Chancery Court.  We affirm the chancellor's
decision pursuant to Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-2(b)(2) due to appellant's
failure to sufficiently abstract the proceedings below.  
     The standard of review of chancery court proceedings is
whether the chancellor's findings were clearly erroneous or clearly
against the preponderance of the evidence.  Riddick v. Streett, 313
Ark. 706,