VIRGINIA GAY LA ROCHE N/K/A VIRGINIA GAY MOORE, APPELLANT,
v.
STEPHEN L. LA ROCHE, 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.
Virginia Gay La Roche appealed a contempt order enforcing a property settlement agreement provision requiring her to execute a promissory note and mortgage. The Florida appellate court reversed, holding that property division awards cannot be enforced through contempt proceedings; only creditor remedies are available.
Property division awards may not be enforced by contempt; the only remedies available are those of a creditor against a debtor. The contempt order and all remedial steps taken by the lower court in exercise of its contempt power were reversed as improper because the agreement itself contained an enforcement provision calling for specific performance, costs, and attorney's fees for breach.
[1] Property division awards in dissolution decrees may not be enforced by contempt; available remedies are limited to those of a creditor against a debtor.
[2] A property settlement agreement provision requiring one party to execute a note and mortgage in exchange for a quitclaim deed is an enforceable debt, not subject to conte…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Property division awards may not be enforced by contempt; the only remedies available are those of a creditor against a debtor.”
Establishes the fundamental legal principle that contempt is an improper enforcement mechanism for property division awards in dissolution settlements.
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 entered into a property settlement agreement in 1988 upon dissolution of their marriage. The agreement required husband to quitclaim the m…
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 Enforcement Of Property Settlement Agreement cases and more on FLexlaw
GRIFFIN, Judge.
Appellant, Virginia Gay La Roche (“wife”), seeks review of an order entered on a motion for contempt filed by appellee, Stephen L. La Roche (“husband”), enforcing a certain provision of a property settlement agreement entered into by the parties at the time of their marriage dissolution in 1988. This provision required husband to give wife a quitclaim deed on the marital home within seven days of execution of the agreement and wife to give husband a note, secured by a mortgage, in the amount of $20,000 payable on or before July 4, 1993. The record suggests that the parties may have made a different arrangement between themselves in the ensuing years. Husband lived in the house for several years while wife lived out of state. Wife claims she is due a setoff for damage to the property during this occupancy and for rent.
Husband evidently first tendered the quitclaim deed through his counsel to wife’s counsel on April 22, 1994. When wife failed to respond by executing the proffered note and mortgage by August 1994, husband filed his motion for contempt. After a hearing, the court entered the appealed order, finding wife in contempt for failing to execute the note and mortgage and for failing to pay the amount set forth in the property settlement agreement. In this same order, the court also entered a judgment for the total amount of principal, interest, attorney’s fees and costs, imposed an equitable lien on the property, and ordered the property sold by the clerk as soon as possible after the expiration of sixty days if the debt was not paid. We reverse.
Property division awards may not be enforced by contempt; the only remedies available are those of a creditor against a debtor. Hertrich v. Hertrich, 643 So. 2d 115 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Veiga v. State, 561 So. 2d 1335, 1336 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). Here, husband had a perfect remedy in the agreement which contained an “enforcement” provision calling for specific performance, costs and attorney’s fees in the event of breach. The remedial steps taken by the lower court in the exercise of its contempt power were improper.1 Accordingly, we reverse the contempt order. REVERSED and REMANDED.
COBB and THOMPSON, JJ., concur. . We cannot accept appellee’s contention that the order was agreed to during the motion for rehearing. The agreement was made in light of the court's contempt order, not in lieu of it.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Roth v. Roth, 973 So. 2d 580 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)…as fully capable of performing. To hold otherwise would permit a party to simply disregard provisions of a final judgment that required that party to perform some act. We will not endorse such a position. We do recognize that in LaRoche v. LaRoche, 662 So. 2d 1018 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995), the Fifth District reversed an order finding the wife in contempt for her failure to give the husband a quitclaim deed to the marital residence. The Fifth District cited the general proposition that property awards are not punis…
-
DeSANTIS v. DeSANTIS, 714 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)…al property rights, only individual property rights. The remedies available for enforcement of those provisions of the final judgment with regard to the equitable distribution of assets are those of creditor against debtor. See La Roche v. La Roche, 662 So. 2d 1018, 1019 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). While a post-judgment QDRO may be entered to secure an interest in a spouse’s pension awarded in the final judgment, see Adkins v. Adkins, 675 So. 2d 199, 201 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996), we do not interpret the provisions of sect…
-
Kadanec v. Kadanec, 765 So. 2d 884 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…abilitative, or Bridge-the-Gap alimony.” Thus, to the extent that the contempt finding rests on the Husband’s failure to pay the $29,945, the order is reversed because property division awards may not be enforced by contempt. See LaRoche v. LaRoche, 662 So. 2d 1018 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). The only remedies available to the Wife to collect the $20,945 are those of creditor against debtor. See DeSantis v. DeSantis, 714 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (holding that although the trial court may not enter a qualified d…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Veiga v. State, 561 So. 2d 1335 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)
- Hertrich v. Hertrich, 643 So. 2d 115 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)