ROBERT RAYMOND SWAIN, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
ELIZABETH M. SWAIN, 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.
Court affirmed contempt finding for failure to pay family support and maintain life insurance, but reversed contempt findings for property distribution violations and attorney fees award lacking need findings.
Contempt may be imposed for failure to pay family support and maintain life insurance, but not for violations of property distribution provisions in a marital settlement agreement.
[1] Contempt of court may not be used to enforce property distribution provisions of a marital settlement agreement, only support obligations.
Previewing 1 of 1 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“contempt may not be used to enforce such provisions”
Court explaining that contempt is improper remedy for property distribution violations
A former husband failed to comply with provisions of a marital settlement agreement incorporated into the final judgment dissolving his marriage, incl…
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 Property Distribution cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant (the former husband) seeks review of a “Second Amended Order on Motion to Compel and for Contempt” holding him in contempt for failure to comply with provisions of a marital settlement agreement incorporated by reference into an amended final judgment dissolving his marriage to appellee (the former wife). We affirm the order to the extent that it finds the former husband to be in contempt of court for (1) failing to pay “family support,” as that term is defined in the settlement agreement, together with applicable charges imposed by the clerk of court; and (2) failing to maintain insurance on his life as security for the support obligation. We reverse the remaining portions of the order because they purport to find the former husband in contempt for failing to comply with provisions of the settlement agreement relating to property distribution, and contempt may not be used to enforce such provisions. E.g., Collins v. Milazzo, 670 So. 2d 1152 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Taylor v. Taylor, 653 So. 2d 1126 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). We also reverse the portion of the order which awards attorney fees to the former wife because there are no findings regarding her need for such an award. E.g., Plantilla v. Plantilla, 111 So. 2d 978, 980 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).
AFFIRMED IN PART and REVERSED IN PART.
WEBSTER, DAVIS and BENTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Taylor v. Taylor, 653 So. 2d 1126 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)
- Collins v. Milazzo, 670 So. 2d 1152 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)