RICHARD C. SRYGLEY APPELLANT
LAQUITA SRYGLEY PARKER AND INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE APPELLEES
FROM THE SEBASTIAN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, FORT SMITH DISTRICT
[NO. 66CV-17-49] HONORABLE J. MICHAEL FITZHUGH, JUDGE
Chronister, for appellant.
Ledbetter, Cogbill, Arnold & Harrison, LLP, by: R. Ray
Fulmer II and Joseph Karl Luebke; and Walters, Gaston,
Allison & Parker, by: Wayland A. Parker II, for appellee
Laquita Srygley Parker.
appeals from the circuit court's August 30, 2017 order.
On appeal, he makes a number of arguments that can be
summarized as the circuit court erred in awarding a one-half
interest in interpleaded proceeds to Laquita Parker because
her lien was (1) subordinate to that of the Internal Revenue
Service (IRS) and (2) void as it was against the operating
agreement of 45 Development Group, LLC (45 Development). We
amended and restated operating agreement of October 13, 2000,
45 Development named Richard Srygley as a member thereof with
a 40 percent ownership interest therein. Though married since
July 18, 1981, Laquita Srygley Parker was not a named member
and had no ownership interest in 45 Development.
and Parker were divorced by decree entered on August 30,
2007. Therein, it was stated:
8. That all matters of property, both marital and
non-marital, jointly and otherwise have been concluded by the
parties to this action by agreement; that this Court has
reviewed a copy of the Child and Custody and Property
Settlement Agreement filed herein; that such Agreement is
fair and equitable and is adopted by this Court. Such
agreement is incorporated, but not merged, herein as fully
and as effectively as if set forth word for word herein.
"Child Custody and Property Settlement Agreement"
(PSA), as is pertinent to this case, stated:
11.RCS LAND COMPANY, LLC: The parties acknowledge that there
is in place a certain limited liability company known and
described as the RCS Land Company and that all the interests
in RCS Land Company is owned by the two irrevocable trusts
established for the use and benefit of the children born of
this marriage as such trusts are described in Paragraph 1.
With respect to RCS Land Company, LLC, the parties agree as
. . . .
The parties acknowledge that RCS Land Company, LLC has been
operated in the past so that it presently generates a
significantly positive cash flow. Based on the present cash
flow available to RCS Land Company, the parties agree that
the Wife will receive the sum of Fourteen Thousand Do1lars
($14, 000.00) per month beginning September l, 2007. It is
anticipated that the cash flow of the company will increase
over the coming years and, in the event of such increase, the
Wife will receive a corresponding increase of the monthly
payment to her. . . . The parties further agree that the
Husband shall be entitled to withdraw an equivalent amount to
what the Wife is drawing each month, assuming that the cash
is available, but that, under no circumstances, can the
Husband draw from RCS Land Company an amount in excess of the
amount drawn by the Wife.
. . . .
12. SECURITY FOR PAYMENT TO WIFE: The parties acknowledge
that the personally [sic] guaranty of the Husband set out in
the preceding paragraph and subparagraphs of this agreement
shall be secured by the Wife claiming a security interest in
the Husband's interest in the Quarry Shopping
Center in Fort Smith, Arkansas. Specifically, if
RCS Land Company, LLC fails to make payment of monthly
payment when due and the Husband defaults on his personal
guaranty, then the Wife may pursue the Husband's interest
in the Quarry Shopping Center in Fort Smith, Arkansas. In the
event that the shopping center is sold, the parties'
interest in the proceeds of such sale shall be divided as
a. That the secured debt on the Quarry Shopping Center will
b. That a certain line of credit in the face amount of $1
million will be paid to the extent that proceeds have been
drawn against such line of credit as of August 3, 2007. Any
proceeds drawn against such line of credit subsequent to