ITZHAK BAK, APPELLANT,
v.
JOYCE BAK, APPELLEE
ITZHAK BAK, APPELLANT,
JOYCE BAK, APPELLEE
947 So. 2d 621
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2007)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. The former husband appeals from an order of contempt. He has failed to present a transcript of proceedings, and thus the appropriateness of the sanctions in the order cannot be addressed, nor can the issue raised with respect to the admissibility of evidence. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla.1979). With respect to his claim that the order requires immediate incarceration upon future non-compliance, the order of contempt contains no such mandatory language. All the trial judge did was express a hope that a successor judge would incarcerate the appellant in the event that he were subsequently found to have violated the terms of the final judgment.
WARNER, POLEN and GROSS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Knox v. PPC, LLC, 183 So. 3d 1098 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)…court’s award of attorneys’ fees and costs to Appellees as a sanction in the order of contempt. Because Appellants have failed to provide an adequate record on appeal, we are unable to review the finding of contempt and therefore affirm. Bah v. Bah, 947 So. 2d 621, 621 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (citing Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla.1979)). 'As to the award of attorneys’ fees, we have previously noted that “orders awarding attorneys’ fees are only final and therefore appealable onc…
Authorities Cited
- Pitcher v. Schneider (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
- Albert v. Applegate et ux., 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1979)