Craig Ballegeer v. Holly Ballegeer

• Court: Court of Appeals of Arkansas
• Decided: April 15, 2026
• Status: Published

Opinion

Cite as 2026 Ark. App. 240 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS No. CV-25-253

CRAIG BALLEGEER Opinion Delivered April 15, 2026

APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE CRAWFORD COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT V. [NO. 17DR-15-497]

HOLLY BALLEGEER HONORABLE MARC MCCUNE, APPELLEE JUDGE

MOTION DENIED

PER CURIAM

Before the court is appellant’s motion seeking relief that, in substance, would require

this court to stay enforcement of the circuit court’s order. However, appellant has neither

requested a stay in accordance with the applicable rules nor filed a supersedeas bond. Under

well-settled Arkansas law, the mere filing of a notice of appeal does not divest the circuit

court of jurisdiction to enforce its orders. The Arkansas Supreme Court held that “even

though the record may have been lodged with the appellate court, where no supersedeas

bond has been filed, the trial court retains jurisdiction to enforce its orders.” Kearney v. Butt,

224 Ark. 94, 96, 271 S.W.2d 771, 772 (1954). This principle was reaffirmed by this court in

Albarran v. Liberty Healthcare Management, 2013 Ark. App. 738, 431 S.W.3d 310. The

purpose of a supersedeas bond is to preserve the status quo during the pendency of an appeal; absent such a bond or a properly granted stay, there is nothing preventing the circuit court

from proceeding to enforce its judgment.

Here, appellant has not obtained a stay from the circuit court. Therefore, the circuit

court retains full authority to enforce its order notwithstanding the pending appeal.

Accordingly, to the extent appellant requests relief that would operate as a stay, the motion

is denied. The circuit court’s jurisdiction to enforce its order remains intact.

Motion denied.

HARRISON, TUCKER, WOOD, and HIXSON, JJ., not participating.

Henry Law Firm, by: Mark Murphey Henry, for appellant.

Smith, Cohen & Horan, PLC, by: Matthew T. Horan, for appellee.