Layman v. Layman

Steele Hays, Justice.

The only issue before us is whether the chancellor’s approval of a report by a special master fixing the value of a partial interest in stock is clearly erroneous.

This is the second appeal by Carol Ann Layman. The facts are more fully stated in Layman v. Layman, 292 Ark. 539, 731 S.W.2d 771 (1987). In the first appeal we reversed the chancellor’s finding that the appreciated value of stock in Layman’s, Incorporated, attributable to the time, effort and skill of Joe Layman, appellee, was not marital property within the meaning of Ark. Code Ann. § 9-12-315 (1987). We…