MIRIAM LEVY, APPELLANT,
v.
ELI LEVY, 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.
A party can be held in contempt for violating a clear settlement agreement order, and the former wife's actions clearly violated the agreement.
The former wife was found in contempt for violating a settlement agreement concerning her children. The agreement required parents to foster the child…
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 Settlement Agreement Interpretation cases and more on FLexlaw
GERSTEN, J.
Miriam Levy (“former wife”) appeals an order finding her in contempt of court for violating a settlement agreement regarding the parties’ children. We affirm.
A person can be held in contempt of court for violating an order when the language of the order is clear and precise and the behavior of the person clearly violates that order. Paul v. Johnson, 604 So. 2d 883 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992). The settlement agreement provides that each parent shall encourage and foster the maximum relations, love and affection between the minor children and the other parent; shall not obstruct or interfere with the other parents right to companionship with the minor children; and shall discuss and work together in an effort to reach a joint decision on all major decisions involving the children. Here, the former wife’s actions clearly violated the settlement agreement.
The former husband and former wife are involved in a particularly acrimonious divorce. Despite the parties negative feelings towards each other, as a parent they have an affirmative obligation to encourage and nurture the relationship between their children and the other parent. See Schutz v. Schutz, 581 So. 2d 1290 (Fla.1991). This obligation includes encouraging the children to interact with the other parent; taking good faith measures to ensure the children visit and have frequent and continuing contact with the noncustodial parent; and refraining from doing anything likely to undermine the relationship naturally fostered by such interaction. Schutz, 581 So. 2d at 1292.
Dissolution proceedings are painful to all parties involved especially minor children. However, facilitating and encouraging positive relationships with the other parent can help ease the children’s transition to a single parent home. We affirm the trial court’s order finding the former wife in contempt of court.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Calloway v. Nabil Tawil, 71 So. 3d 934 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011)…treme circumstances, a parent has the obligation to encourage a positive relationship between the minor child and the other parent. See Schutz v. Schutz, 581 So. 2d 1290 (Fla.1991); Marcus v. Marcus, 902 So. 2d 259 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Levy v. Levy, 861 So. 2d 1211 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003); see also § 61.13(3)(a), Fla. Stat. (2010) (demonstrated capacity and disposition of parent to facilitate and encourage close and continuing parent-child relationship is factor for court to consider in determination of time-sharin…
Authorities Cited
- Paul v. Johnson, 604 So. 2d 883 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)
- Laurel D. Schutz v. Schutz, 581 So. 2d 1290 (Fla. 1991)