Ark. Code Ann. » Title 18 Chapter 15
Arkansas Code Annotated

Ark. Code Ann. § 18-15-605 (2026)

Damages — Deposits

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaArk. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
  1. The further proceedings in the matter of assessment of damages and the making of deposits to secure the owner shall be the same as is now prescribed by law in reference to condemnation proceedings by railroad, telegraph, and telephone corporations, except that the measure of damages shall be the fair market value of the condemned property at the time of the filing of the petition by the corporation or water association as may be determined by law.
  2. In the case of application for orders of immediate possession by the corporation or water association, if the amount awarded by the jury exceeds the amount deposited by the corporation or water association in an amount which is more than twenty percent (20%) of the sum deposited, the landowner shall be entitled to recover the reasonable attorney's fees and costs.

History. Acts 1895, No. 126, § 6, p. 183; C. & M. Dig., § 4039; Pope's Dig., § 5041; A.S.A. 1947, § 35-406; Acts 1995, No. 1207, § 3; 1999, No. 55, § 1.

Amendments. The 1999 amendment substituted “determined by law” for “determined by a jury based on the opinion of a licensed appraiser” in (a).

Case Notes

Attorney's Fees.

The 1995 amendment to this section, made after entry of the order of possession but before trial and entry of the judgment, was procedural in nature and thus retroactive. City of Ozark v. Nichols, 56 Ark. App. 85, 937 S.W.2d 686 (1997).

Award of fees as sanctions was reversed because oral representations could not be the basis for sanctions under Ark. R. Civ. P. 11; further, in light of the uncertainty in the statutes, the trial court erred in finding that subsection (b) of this section was inapplicable. City of Fort Smith v. Carter, 364 Ark. 100, 216 S.W.3d 594 (2005).

Mortgagees, who were awarded compensation by a jury after eminent domain proceedings were instituted by a city, were not entitled to attorney’s fees because the mortgagees had no right of possession in the condemned land. City of Fort Smith v. Carter, 372 Ark. 93, 270 S.W.3d 822 (2008).

In a condemnation action, the property owners incurred expenses in successfully defending the appeal. To place them in the same position they were in prior to the taking by the water district, the appellate court granted their request for attorney's fees and costs that were incurred during their defending of the appeal pursuant to subsection (b) of this section. Beaver Water Dist. v. Garner, 102 Ark. App. 188, 283 S.W.3d 595 (2008).

Although drainage was part of the purpose of a city's condemnation, improvement of drainage ancillary to improvement of a public road did not involve the city's exercise of eminent domain relating to waterworks. Therefore, subsection (b) of this section did not apply, and the landowner was not entitled to attorney's fees. Lois Marie Combs Revocable Trust v. City of Russellville, 2011 Ark. 186 (2011).

Trial court erred in awarding attorney's fees to a lessee in an airport eminent domain proceeding brought under § 14-362-120 because subsection (b) of this section applied only to municipal corporations and other corporations that supplied water to cities, towns, or rural areas. Delta Reg'l Airport Auth. v. Gunn, 2011 Ark. App. 701, 386 S.W.3d 693 (2011).

Circuit court properly denied the owners' request for attorney's fees because this section was not applicable to the owners' case where the city brought its condemnation action under subchapter 3, §§ 18-15-301 to 18-51-309. Giles v. Ozark Mt. Reg'l Pub. Water Auth. of Ark., 2014 Ark. 171 (2014).

In an eminent domain proceeding brought by a municipal water and sewage commission for two utility easements, the trial court properly denied the landowner's motion for attorney's fees under subsection (b) of this section because the taking was limited to sewer lines and thus this section was inapplicable. The language of the easement, “water transmission line(s) and/or sewer collection lines”, was ambiguous, and extrinsic evidence demonstrated that the commission was exercising its eminent domain powers exclusively for the construction of sewer lines, and not water lines. Blanchard v. City of Springdale, 2019 Ark. App. 522, 588 S.W.3d 807 (2019).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1997–2019 · leading case: City of Fort Smith v. Carter, 216 S.W.3d 594 (Ark. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
City of Fort Smith v. Carter, 216 S.W.3d 594 (Ark. 2005). · cites it 48× “Cross-Appeal Appellees argue that the circuit court improperly denied their motion for award of attorney's fees pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 18-15-605 (b). This court's review of the circuit court's denial of the appellees' motion for attorney's fees involves a matter of…”
City of Fort Smith v. Carter, 270 S.W.3d 822 (Ark. 2008). · cites it 22× “Ark. Code Ann. § 18-15-605 provides for an award of attorney’s fees in certain cases when a jury decides that the deposit made by the petitioning municipality is less than the reasonable value of the land.”
Rick A. Blanchard, as Tr. of the Rick A. Blanchard Living Trust Agreement Dated August 18, 1989 v. City of Springdale, Arkansas, a Mun. Corp. Acting by & Through Its Water & Sewer Comm'n, 2019 Ark. App. 522 (Ark. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 46× “The Trust’s motion was made pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 18-15-605 (b) (Repl. 2015), which provides: In the case of application for orders of immediate possession by the corporation or water association, if the amount awarded by the jury exceeds the amount deposited by the…”
Giles v. Ozark Mountain Reg'l Pub. Water Auth., 2013 Ark. App. 639 (Ark. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 18× “Ark. Code Ann. § 18-15-605 (b) (Repl. 2003).”
Giles v. Ozark Mountain Reg'l Pub. Water Auth., 2014 Ark. 171 (Ark. 2014). · cites it 34× “On March 26, 2012, pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 18-15-605 (b) (Repl. 2003), Giles filed a motion for attorney’s fees.”
City of Ozark v. Nichols, 937 S.W.2d 686 (Ark. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 7× “Plaintiff objected to an award of attorney’s fees on the basis that they were not authorized by law at the time the condemnation case was instituted or at the time the order of possession was entered.”
Delta Reg'l Airport Auth. v. Gunn, 386 S.W.3d 693 (Ark. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 24× “Section 18-15-605 provides: |7(a) The further proceedings in the matter of assessment of damages and the making of deposits to secure the owner shall be the same as is now prescribed by law in reference to condemnation proceedings by railroad, telegraph, and telephone…”
Beaver Water Dist. v. Garner, 283 S.W.3d 595 (Ark. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 3× “See Beaver Water Dist. v. Garner, CA 07-777 (Ark. Ct. App.”
City of Fort Smith v. Hackler, 216 S.W.2d 603 (Ark. 2005). · cites it 6× “The City of Fort Smith appeals the Crawford County Circuit Court’s award of attorney’s fees pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 18-15-605 (b) (Repl. 2003) to landowners Lee and Patricia Hackler in an eminent-domain action.”
Ark. Code Ann. § 18-15-605(a): 1 case
Delta Reg'l Airport Auth. v. Gunn, 386 S.W.3d 693 (Ark. Ct. App. 2011). “Section 18-15-605 provides: |7(a) The further proceedings in the matter of assessment of damages and the making of deposits to secure the owner shall be the same as is now prescribed by law in reference to condemnation proceedings by railroad, telegraph, and telephone…”
Ark. Code Ann. § 18-15-605(b): 8 cases
City of Fort Smith v. Carter, 216 S.W.3d 594 (Ark. 2005). “Cross-Appeal Appellees argue that the circuit court improperly denied their motion for award of attorney's fees pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 18-15-605 (b). This court's review of the circuit court's denial of the appellees' motion for attorney's fees involves a matter of…”
City of Fort Smith v. Carter, 270 S.W.3d 822 (Ark. 2008). “Ark. Code Ann. § 18-15-605 provides for an award of attorney’s fees in certain cases when a jury decides that the deposit made by the petitioning municipality is less than the reasonable value of the land.”
Giles v. Ozark Mountain Reg'l Pub. Water Auth., 2013 Ark. App. 639 (Ark. Ct. App. 2013). “Ark. Code Ann. § 18-15-605 (b) (Repl. 2003).”
Delta Reg'l Airport Auth. v. Gunn, 386 S.W.3d 693 (Ark. Ct. App. 2011). “Section 18-15-605 provides: |7(a) The further proceedings in the matter of assessment of damages and the making of deposits to secure the owner shall be the same as is now prescribed by law in reference to condemnation proceedings by railroad, telegraph, and telephone…”
Rick A. Blanchard, as Tr. of the Rick A. Blanchard Living Trust Agreement Dated August 18, 1989 v. City of Springdale, Arkansas, a Mun. Corp. Acting by & Through Its Water & Sewer Comm'n, 2019 Ark. App. 522 (Ark. Ct. App. 2019). “The Trust’s motion was made pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 18-15-605 (b) (Repl. 2015), which provides: In the case of application for orders of immediate possession by the corporation or water association, if the amount awarded by the jury exceeds the amount deposited by the…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.