KLENTON MCLEMORE, APPELLANT,
v.
PENNY MCLEMORE, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
In this family law appeal, the Florida First District Court of Appeal dismissed two appeals filed by a husband who was held in contempt for failing to pay alimony and child support arrearage and who absconded from the jurisdiction to avoid jail. The court held that a party cannot invoke appellate authority while simultaneously defying the lower court's orders.
The court granted the wife's motions to dismiss both appeals, holding that a party cannot invoke appellate authority while scorning and defying the rulings of the trial court. A party must comply with lower court orders or post an appeal bond before seeking appellate review.
[1] An appellate court may dismiss an appeal when the appellant has failed to comply with the orders of the lower court.
[2] A party who is in contempt of a trial court's order and has absented himself from the jurisdiction cannot invoke the authority of an appellate court.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Husband cannot invoke the authority of this court at the same time he is scorning the rulings of the trial court.”
Establishes the core principle that a party seeking appellate review must comply with lower court orders or be subject to dismissal.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe parties were divorced in 1983. When the husband failed to pay alimony, the wife sought contempt proceedings. The trial court found the husband wil…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Appeal Bond cases and more on FLexlaw
ON APPELLEE’S MOTIONS TO DISMISS
PER CURIAM.
We have consolidated these two cases for consideration of appellee’s motions to dismiss. We grant the motions to dismiss.
The parties were divorced in 1983. Husband took an appeal and this court specifically affirmed the trial court’s awards of child support and alimony. McLemore v. McLemore, 537 So. 2d 675 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). Because the distribution of marital property was unclear and inconsistent with the alimony awarded, the case was reversed and remanded for clarification.
When husband failed to make the alimony payments, wife filed a motion in the trial court seeking to have husband held in contempt. The trial court found that husband had wilfully violated the trial court’s order, had the ability to pay the $14,000 arrearage, but had failed to do so. Husband was found to be in contempt of court. The trial court allowed husband to purge himself from contempt by paying the arrearage at the rate of $1500 a month. If the husband failed to pay the arrearage as provided, the trial court ordered that he be jailed for 90 days. Husband took an appeal from the order adjudicating him in contempt, which was assigned case number 89-3224.
Thereafter, the trial court entered an order which distributed the parties’ real property. Husband filed a notice of appeal, which was assigned case number 90-1416.
Wife now files a motion to dismiss in each case, arguing that husband has failed to comply with the order of the trial court and has neither paid the arrearage nor posted an appeal bond, as allowed by the trial court. Instead, husband has absented himself so he can not be found in the county and taken into custody. In fact, the initial brief filed in case number 89-3224 admits that husband is “on the lam.” Wife states that an appellate court should not be required to determine the correctness of the action of the lower court when husband refuses without cause to abide by the lower court’s order. Morris v. Rabara, 145 So. 2d 265 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962).
A show cause order issued in each case and two responses have been filed, one by counsel of record and one by husband. Counsel admits that husband has not paid the alimony award nor the arrearage, but argues that husband has not ignored any rulings of the lower court. Counsel argues that husband does not have the ability to pay the alimony award. Counsel again concedes that husband is “on the lam” but argues that he has no other choice if he wants to stay out of jail.
We grant the wife’s motions and dismiss these appeals. Husband has failed to pay the alimony arrearage as ordered by the trial court. He has not posted an appeal bond as allowed by the trial court. He has absented himself from the jurisdiction of the trial court. Husband cannot invoke the authority of this court at the same time he is scorning the rulings of the trial court. See, Davidson v. District Court of Appeal, 501 So. 2d 603 (Fla.1987); Gazil v. Gazil, 343 So. 2d 595 (Fla.1977); and Pasin v. Pasin, 517 So. 2d 742 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987), rev. denied, 528 So. 2d 1183 (Fla.1988). The appeals shall stand dismissed.
SMITH, BOOTH and WENTWORTH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rodriguez v. Rodriguez, 640 So. 2d 133 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)…ity. We decline to do so. “Where the appellant has disobeyed an order of the trial court, the appellate court may, in its discretion, either entertain or dismiss an appeal.” Gazil v. Gazil, 343 So. 2d 595, 597 (Fla.1977); see McLemore v. McLemore, 567 So. 2d 23, 24 (Fla. 1st DCA), cause dismissed, 576 So. 2d 289 (Fla.1990); Segall v. Downtown Assocs., 546 So. 2d 11, 12 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Keidaish v. Smith, 400 So. 2d 90, 91 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981); see also State v. Gurican, 576 So. 2d 709 (Fla.1991) (discussi…
-
Sell v. Sell, 882 So. 2d 400 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)…o. 2d 138 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); Gazil v. Gazil, 343 So. 2d 595, 597 (Fla.1977) (“Where the appellant has disobeyed an order of the trial court, the appellate court may, in its discretion, either entertain or dismiss an appeal.”); McLemore v. McLemore, 567 So. 2d 23, 24 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Segall v. Downtown Assocs., 546 So. 2d 11, 12 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Keidaish v. Smith, 400 So. 2d 90, 91 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981). An appellate court, however, should ordinarily provide a grace period prior to dismissing the appeal,…
-
Simoes v. Ignez Simoes, 790 So. 2d 1221 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)…onduct reflecting contemptuous disregard for the trial court’s orders, we exercise our discretion and dismiss the appeal. See Gazil v. Gazil, 343 So. 2d 595 (Fla.1977); Rodriguez v. Rodriguez, 640 So. 2d 133 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); McLemore v. McLemore, 567 So. 2d 23 (Fla. 1st DCA), cause dismissed, 576 So. 2d 289 (Fla.1990); Pasin v. Pasin, 517 So. 2d 742 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987). Appeal dismissed.…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Gazil v. Gazil, 343 So. 2d 595 (Fla. 1977)
- Morris v. Rabara, 145 So. 2d 265 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962)
- Davidson v. Dist. Court OF Appeal, 501 So. 2d 603 (Fla. 1987)
- Pasin v. Pasin, 517 So. 2d 742 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)
- Klenton McLEMORE v. McLEMORE, 537 So. 2d 675 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)